[00:00:02] YOU'RE WATCHING THE MEETING OF THE DALLAS CITY COUNCIL WITH MAYOR ERIC L JOHNSON, MAYOR PRO TEM JESSE MORENO, DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM GAY DONNELL WILLIS. COUNCIL MEMBERS CHAD WEST, ZARIN D GRACEY, MAXINE JOHNSON, JAIME RESENDEZ, LAURA CADENA, ADAM BAZALDUA, LORIE BLAIR, PAULA BLACKMON, KATHY STEWART, WILLIAM ROTH, CARA MENDELSOHN, PAUL E. RIDLEY. CITY MANAGER KIMBERLY BIZOR TOLBERT, CITY SECRETARY BILIERAE JOHNSON, AND CITY ATTORNEY TAMMY PALOMINO. GOOD MORNING. [Call to Order] WE HAVE A QUORUM. TODAY IS WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 3RD, 2020, FIVE TIMES 9:18 A.M. AND I NOW CALL THIS MEETING OF THE DALLAS CITY COUNCIL TO ORDER. THIS MORNING, DO I? OH, HE'S RIGHT IN FRONT OF ME. OUR GOOD FRIEND RABBI PALEY FROM TEMPLE SHALOM. HE'S A POLICE CHAPLAIN WITH THE DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT, AND I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER HIM NOW FOR OUR INVOCATION, FOLLOWED BY OUR PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE UNITED STATES FLAG AND THE TEXAS FLAG. GOOD MORNING, RABBI PALEY. FOR ALLOWING ME TO BE HERE TODAY, MEMBERS OF OUR CITY COUNCIL. GOD OF MANY NAMES. SOURCE OF WISDOM AND STRENGTH. AS WE BEGIN THIS NEW WEEK OF PUBLIC SERVICE AFTER A LONG HOLIDAY WEEKEND, WE TAKE A MOMENT TO REFLECT ON THIS LABOR DAY JUST BEHIND US. IT'S THE DAY WE OFTEN ASSOCIATE WITH BARBECUES AND BACK TO SCHOOL SALES. BUT AT ITS HEART, LABOR DAY IS ABOUT SOMETHING DEEPER, HONORING THE DIGNITY OF WORK AND THOSE WHO DO IT. THE MILLIONS OF PEOPLE WHOSE DAILY EFFORTS HOLD UP THE FOUNDATIONS OF OUR SOCIETY, FROM THOSE WHO BUILD OUR INFRASTRUCTURE, TO THOSE WHO CARE FOR OUR CHILDREN, CLEAN OUR STREETS AND RUN OUR SMALL BUSINESSES. THEIR WORK DESERVES MORE THAN JUST A DAY OFF. IT DESERVES RESPECT, EQUITY AND POLICY THAT HONORS THEIR WORTH. SO AS WE DO THE LABOR OF GOVERNANCE TODAY, MAY WE CARRY WITH US A RENEWED SENSE OF PURPOSE TO SEE THE PEOPLE BEHIND THE POLICIES, TO PROTECT THE DIGNITY OF EVERY WORKER AND TO MAKE DECISIONS THAT REFLECT NOT JUST WHAT IS EFFICIENT, BUT OF COURSE, WHAT IS RIGHT. AND LET US ALSO REMEMBER THAT LEADERSHIP IS A SACRED FORM OF LABOR, ONE THAT DEMANDS CARE AND HUMILITY AND A COMMITMENT TO THE COMMON GOOD. WE PRAY THAT THIS COUNCIL MEET THAT TASK WITH OPEN MINDS, WITH GENEROUS HEARTS, AND WITH STEADY HANDS. AMEN. EVERYONE. IF YOU ARE ABLE. IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND RISING FOR OUR PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE UNITED STATES FLAG AND THE TEXAS FLAG. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. HONOR THE TEXAS FLAG. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE, TEXAS. ONE STATE UNDER GOD, ONE AND INDIVISIBLE. THANK YOU SO MUCH, EVERYONE. YOU MAY BE SEATED. I THINK WE HAVE ONE ANNOUNCEMENT THIS MORNING AND IT'S FROM OUR CITY MANAGER, [Special Presentations] SO I WILL TURN IT OVER TO. TWO ANNOUNCEMENTS. A SURPRISE ANNOUNCEMENT FROM OUR CITY MANAGER. SO I'LL TURN IT OVER TO KIM TOLBERT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. AND GOOD MORNING, MR. MAYOR. AND TO THE CITY COUNCIL. I'M EXCITED TO PRESENT A VERY SPECIAL RECOGNITION TODAY TO AN EXTRAORDINARY 311 CALL AGENT HERE AT THE CITY OF DALLAS, MISS LYDIA [INAUDIBLE], OUR 311 CALL AGENTS ARE THE VOICE OF THE CITY. AND THEY ARE THE FIRST POINT OF CONTACT FOR MANY OF OUR RESIDENTS AND OUR CUSTOMERS. THEY SHAPE OUR CUSTOMERS EXPERIENCE. LYDIA HAS SET A GOLD STANDARD FOR THAT EXPERIENCE. SHE'S EARNED THE TITLE OF AGENT OF THE MONTH FOR NINE CONSECUTIVE MONTHS. THIS IS AN OUTSTANDING ACHIEVEMENT THAT SPEAKS VOLUMES ABOUT HER DEDICATION, HER CONSISTENCY, AND HER COMMITMENT TO CUSTOMER SERVICE. SO WE WANT THIS MORNING TO THANK YOU, LYDIA. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMITMENT TO SERVICE FIRST NOW. IT IS NOT JUST APPRECIATED BUT IS ACTUALLY INSPIRING. WE THANK YOU FOR CONTINUING TO SHOW WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE TO SERVE AND TO DO IT WITH EXCELLENCE. AT THIS TIME, WILL YOU PLEASE COME DOWN FOR A QUICK PHOTO WITH THE DALLAS CITY COUNCIL? LYDIA. [APPLAUSE] SHE'S GOING TO SAY SOMETHING. DID YOU WANT TO SAY [00:05:06] ANYTHING FROM THE MICROPHONE BEFORE YOU COME IN? THANK Y'ALL EVERYBODY. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT COUNTS. THAT'S SOMETHING. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YOU CAN COME ON INSIDE THE RAIL AND TAKE A PHOTOGRAPH RIGHT HERE. NO. YOU'RE GOOD. SORRY TO MAKE YOU GO UP AND DOWN AND BACK AND FORTH THERE, KIM. I KNOW YOU GOT ONE MORE. THANK YOU SO MUCH. OUR SECOND PRESENTATION THIS MORNING IS TO RECOGNIZE THE EMPLOYEES OF OUR HR DEPARTMENT ON A PROGRAM THAT CONTINUES TO PERFORM ABOVE OUR PEERS, OUR EMPLOYEE HEALTH BENEFITS PROGRAM. OUR HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND THE OFFICE OF PROCUREMENT SERVICES, SUCCESSFULLY MANAGED A HIGHLY COMPLEX, SELF-FUNDED HEALTH PLAN THAT IS OFFERED TO ALL OF OUR EMPLOYEES, INCLUDING OUR POLICE AND OUR FIREFIGHTERS, AS WELL AS THEIR FAMILIES AND RETIREES, COVERING OVER 30,000 LIVES IN TOTAL. EVEN AS HEALTH CARE COSTS HAVE CONTINUED TO INCREASE FOR PRESCRIPTION DRUGS, HOSPITAL VISITS AND MAJOR PROCEDURES, THIS TEAM HAS ENSURED THAT OUR EMPLOYEES AND RETIREES CONTINUE TO RECEIVE QUALITY, AFFORDABLE COVERAGE THANKS TO THEIR RECENT EFFORTS. OUR OPEN ENROLLMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026 BRINGS REAL BENEFITS FOR PARTICIPANTS, WHILE ACHIEVING SIGNIFICANT SAVINGS OF MORE THAN $12 MILLION. I WANT TO RECOGNIZE TODAY THE FOLLOWING TEAM MEMBERS FOR THEIR LEADERSHIP AND THEIR DEDICATION. NINA ARIAS, OUR DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES. CARMEL FRITZ AND TOMMY WALLACE, ASSISTANT DIRECTORS OF HUMAN RESOURCES. CHERYL MAYO, OUR HR ADMINISTRATOR. JUANITA ORTIZ, DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF PROCUREMENT SERVICES. KIMBERLY FRANKLIN, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF PROCUREMENT SERVICES. MELANIE HENSEL, MANAGER, OFFICE OF PROCUREMENT SERVICES. JANELLE NORRIS, HR CONTRACT ANALYST. SANDRA OVALIS, BENEFITS MANAGER. AND WILLOW SANCHEZ AND STEPHEN FREELAND OF THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. THIS TEAM ACCOMPLISHED IN JUST A FEW MONTHS THE BUNDLING OF MEDICAL AND PHARMACY BENEFITS, ESTABLISHING A DIRECT RELATIONSHIP WITH PRIME PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES TO BETTER NEGOTIATE POWER AND PROGRAM FLEXIBILITY. THEY EXPANDED SPECIALTY PHARMACY PROGRAMS AND LAUNCHED THE ADVOCATE PLUS PHARMACY MATCH PROGRAM. THEY ALSO DID DIRECT CONTRACTS FOR EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM. THIS PROGRAM PROVIDES ENHANCED SUPPORT FOR MENTAL AND EMOTIONAL HEALTH NEEDS OF OUR EMPLOYEES, RETIREES, AND THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS. FOR 2026, THIS TEAM HAS DELIVERED THREE MEDICAL PLAN CHOICES CONTINUATION OF OUR TIERED PROGRAMS AND CONTINUE WITH OUR EMPLOYEE PAID LIFE INSURANCE FOR ALL ELIGIBLE CITY OF DALLAS EMPLOYEES. EVERY DOLLAR SAVED IN OUR SELF-FUNDED PLAN HELPS SUSTAIN JOBS AND ENSURES HIGH QUALITY BENEFITS FOR OUR EMPLOYEES AND OUR RETIREES, ENABLING THE CITY TO ATTRACT AND RETAIN THE TALENT IT NEEDS TO SERVE OUR RESIDENTS HERE IN DALLAS. AND SO TODAY, WE CELEBRATE, AND WE RECOGNIZE AND THANK THESE INDIVIDUALS FOR YOUR ONGOING WORK, THE STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESS THAT WENT ALONG TO GET US TO TODAY'S SUCCESS, TO THE METICULOUS MANAGEMENT AND THE BEHIND THE SCENES EFFORTS THAT KEEP OUR HEALTH BENEFITS PROGRAM THE BEST IN CLASS. MR. MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL, WILL YOU PLEASE JOIN ME IN CONGRATULATING THESE CITY OF DALLAS EMPLOYEES ON A JOB WELL DONE? [00:10:11] [APPLAUSE] WILL YOU GUYS COME DOWN FRONT SO WE CAN GET A PHOTO WITH THE COUNCIL, PLEASE? THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT. IF THERE ARE NO MORE ANNOUNCEMENTS, WE'LL MOVE ON TO OUR OPEN MICROPHONE SPEAKERS. [Open Microphone Speakers] MADAM SECRETARY. GOOD MORNING. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR, AND GOOD MORNING. THE DALLAS CITY COUNCIL WILL NOW HEAR ITS FIRST FIVE REGISTERED SPEAKERS. I'LL RECITE THE SPEAKER GUIDELINES. SPEAKERS MUST OBSERVE THE SAME RULES OF PROPRIETY, DECORUM AND GOOD CONDUCT APPLICABLE TO MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL. ANY SPEAKER MAKING PERSONAL AND PERTINENT, PROFANE OR SLANDEROUS REMARKS, OR WHO BECOMES BOISTEROUS WHILE ADDRESSING THE CITY COUNCIL, WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE ROOM. FOR THOSE INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE IN PERSON. FOR THOSE VIRTUAL SPEAKERS, YOU WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE SESSION. INDIVIDUALS ARE GIVEN THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK. FOR THOSE IN PERSON SPEAKERS, YOU'LL NOTICE THE TIME ON THE MONITOR AT THE PODIUM. YOUR TIME IS UP. PLEASE STOP. FOR THOSE VIRTUAL SPEAKERS, I WILL ANNOUNCE WHEN YOUR TIME HAS EXPIRED. ALSO, SPEAKERS, PLEASE BE MINDFUL THAT DURING YOUR PUBLIC COMMENTS, YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO REFER TO A CITY COUNCIL MEMBER BY NAME AND ADDRESS YOUR COMMENTS TO MAYOR JOHNSON ONLY. YOUR FIRST SPEAKER, KATHY KAUFMAN. NO, YOUR MIC. IS IT ON NOW? YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING EVERYBODY. MY NAME IS KATHY KAUFMAN AND I LIVE AT 810805 LARKGLEN CIRCLE. THIS BUDGET SEASON, I URGE YOU TO PRIORITIZE THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE FOR DALLAS RESIDENTS, AND THAT'S PUBLIC SAFETY. COMMUNITY SURVEYS SHOW WHAT MANY OF US ALREADY FEEL IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. RESIDENTS ARE CONCERNED ABOUT SLOW POLICE RESPONSE TIMES AND THE RISE IN CRIME. AS A GRANDMOTHER, I SHARE THOSE CONCERNS DEEPLY. I WANT TO KNOW THAT WHEN MY FAMILY NEEDS HELP, THAT SOMEONE WILL BE THERE. THERE WILL BE ENOUGH WELL-TRAINED, MOTIVATED OFFICERS READY TO RESPOND. BUT THE REALITY IS, TOO MANY OFFICERS ARE LEAVING OUR POLICE FORCE. THEY ARE LEAVING BECAUSE OUR PENSION IS NOT FULLY FUNDED AND BECAUSE DALLAS DOES NOT PAY COMPETITIVELY. WE ARE NOT IN THE TOP FIVE CITIES IN OUR REGION FOR POLICE PAY, AND THAT MAKES IT HARDER TO RECRUIT AND KEEP THE OFFICERS THAT WE NEED. THAT'S WHY I RESPECTFULLY ASK YOU TO MAKE PUBLIC SAFETY YOUR TOP PRIORITY IN THIS BUDGET. HIRE MORE OFFICERS. RAISE POLICE PAY TO AT LEAST THE TOP FIVE IN THE NORTH TEXAS AREA. OR BETTER YET, NUMBER ONE. SEND A CLEAR SIGNAL TO OUR OFFICERS THAT WE VALUE THEIR SERVICE AND TO OUR RESIDENTS THAT DALLAS IS SERIOUS ABOUT TACKLING CRIME AND PROTECTING ITS FAMILIES. NOTHING IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN SAFETY TO ALL OF OUR CITIZENS, TO OUR BUSINESSES AND SCHOOLS, TO NAME A FEW. PLEASE MAKE DALLAS NUMBER ONE. PUT US AT THE TOP WHEN IT COMES TO SUPPORTING OUR POLICE OFFICERS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MARY ELLEN SMITH. GOOD MORNING. IS IT ON NOW? OKAY. MY NAME IS MARY ELLEN SMITH, AND I LIVE AT 13122 HILLCREST ROAD. THANK YOU FOR THE LONG HOURS YOU SPEND ON BEHALF OF DALLAS. I WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS AN IMPORTANT MATTER TODAY, WHICH IS HONESTY. WE'VE HEARD OVER AND OVER AGAIN THAT THIS PLAN PUTS DALLAS OFFICERS IN THE TOP THREE FOR THE REGION. THIS IS FALSE. THE ACTUAL PROPOSED STARTING SALARY 81,232, RANKS DALLAS 12TH AMONG NORTH DALLAS DEPARTMENTS. THAT'S NOT TOP THREE. IT'S NOT TOP FIVE, AND IT'S BARELY MIDDLE OF THE PACK. [00:15:02] THE OFFICE. THE PEOPLE OF DALLAS VOTED FOR PROPOSITION U PRECISELY BECAUSE THEY WANTED OFFICERS TO BE PAID COMPETITIVELY IN THE TOP FIVE. THEY WERE TIRED OF BEING A TRAINING GROUND FOR OTHER CITIES. TODAY, 40% OF OUR OFFICERS LEAVE WITHIN THE FIRST FIVE YEARS, TAKING THE 275,000 IN TAXPAYER FUNDED TRAINING WITH THEM TO OTHER DEPARTMENTS THAT VALUE AND PAY THEM MORE. IT'S NOT ONLY UNSAFE, IT'S ALSO FINANCIALLY IRRESPONSIBLE. THIS COUNCIL IS INFLATING NUMBERS BY INCLUDING STIPENDS LIKE BILINGUAL PAY AND SPECIAL ASSIGNMENTS IN BASE SALARY CALCULATIONS, EVEN THOUGH NOT ALL OFFICERS RECEIVE THEM. AS A RESULT, DALLAS IS BEING PRESENTED AS A TOP THREE CITY WHICH IS ACTUALLY RANKED 12TH, WHICH MISLEADS THE PUBLIC, DISRESPECTS OFFICERS, AND VIOLATES THE LAW. DALLAS IS THE LARGEST, MOST COMPLEX LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY IN NORTH TEXAS. OUR OFFICERS FACE THE TOUGHEST CALLS, THE MOST DANGEROUS SITUATIONS, AND THE GREATEST CHALLENGES. THEY SHOULD BE PAID BEST NOT SITTING AT 12TH PLACE. SMALLER SUBURBS LIKE ALLEN AND FRISCO OUT PAID DALLAS. THAT SHOULD NEVER HAPPEN. THE PUBLIC IS SMART. THEY'RE PAYING ATTENTION. THEY SEE THE DISCONNECT BETWEEN WHAT THEY WERE PROMISED AND WHAT'S BEING DELIVERED. AND THEY WILL NOT ACCEPT SPIN. THEY EXPECT COMPLIANCE WITH PROPOSITION U AND NOT EXCUSES. IF YOU WANT TO REBUILD TRUST, STOP PRETENDING. ADMIT THE TRUTH. DALLAS IS NOT TOP THREE. IT IS NOT TOP. TOP FIVE. IT IS 12. AND UNTIL YOU FIX THAT, THE CITY IS IN VIOLATION OF ITS OWN CHARTER. I URGE YOU TO MAKE PUBLIC SAFETY THE NUMBER ONE LINE IN THIS BUDGET, AND SHOW RESIDENTS THAT KEEPING DALLAS SAFE TRULY COMES FIRST. I'D ALSO LIKE TO SAY TO EACH OF YOU THAT IF YOU HAVE NOT GONE ON A POLICE RIDE ALONG, THAT YOU SHOULD. IT OPENS YOUR EYE TO WHAT THE POLICE OFFICERS FACE EVERY SINGLE DAY. IT IS SCARY AND I GRANT IT TO YOU THAT THEY WOULD. YOU WOULD GIVE THEM MORE MONEY AFTER YOU SEE WHAT HAPPENS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. CATHERINE TINA LEWIS PETERSON. YOUR MICROPHONE. THERE'S A BUTTON AT THE BASE OF THAT MICROPHONE. OKAY. THANK YOU. SORRY. HELLO. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS TINA LEWIS PETERSON AND I LIVE IN DISTRICT 11. I'M HERE TO TALK ABOUT OUR POLICE SALARIES IN DALLAS. DALLAS IS THE NINTH LARGEST CITY IN AMERICA. PUBLIC SAFETY IS THE MOST IMPORTANT TOPIC IN OUR COUNTRY TODAY. PROPOSITION U REQUIRES DALLAS POLICE TO BE PAID IN THE TOP FIVE FOR STARTING SALARIES. YET WE'VE TAKEN SELECTIVE ADD ONS LIKE EDUCATION PAY, BILINGUAL PAY, OR SPECIALTY ASSIGNMENTS AND WRONGFULLY TREATING THEM AS BASE SALARY TO INFLATE THE BASE SALARY NUMBERS AND THEN USE THEM TO CLAIM COMPLIANCE. THESE ACCOUNTING GAMES ARE MISLEADING TO OFFICERS, RESIDENTS, AND DIRECTLY UNDERMINE THE SPIRIT OF THE LAW. RIGHT NOW, DALLAS BASED PAY IS RANKED 12TH IN NORTH TEXAS. THAT MEANS WE'RE TRAILING BEHIND SMALLER CITIES WITH FAR FEWER RESPONSIBILITIES LIKE ALLEN, FRISCO, AND MCKINNEY. WE ARE THE NUMBER ONE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY IN NORTH TEXAS, HANDLING THE TOUGHEST CASES AND THE LARGEST POPULATION. WE SHOULD BE THE BEST PAID POLICE FORCE, NOT 12TH. LET'S CALL IT WHAT IT IS. THE CITY IS MANIPULATING THE BOOKS. AND BY WAY OF ACCOUNTING TRICKS, YOU ARE KNOWINGLY INFLATING OFFICERS PAY BY COUNTING STIPENDS AND BENEFITS THAT NOT EVERY OFFICER RECEIVES. YOU KNOW YOU ARE PADDING THE BOOKS, SO TO SPEAK, FOR THE POLICE OFFICER SALARIES. THIS IS WHAT I CALL A TYPE OF A SHELL GAME. THESE MEN AND WOMEN PUT THEIR LIVES ON THE LINE EVERY DAY. LET'S PAY THEM A FAIR WAGE WITHOUT ACCOUNTING TRICKERY. ALL THE SMALLER COUNTIES ARE STEALING OUR POLICE ACADEMY GRADUATES WITH HIGHER BASE SALARIES AND A RELIABLE FUNDED PENSION PLAN. STOP PADDING THE NUMBERS AND TRYING TO CONVINCE US THAT STIPENDS ARE SALARIES, OFFERS AND VOTERS KNOW THE DIFFERENCE AT THE END OF THE DAY. NOTHING ELSE IN THIS BUDGET WILL MATTER IF DALLAS ISN'T SAFE. THERE IS NO SUBSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC SAFETY. PLEASE MAKE THE TOUGH BUDGET CUTS NOW. CUT THE WASTE AND EXCESS IN THE BUDGET AND PAY OUR OFFICERS WHAT THEY DESERVE. OR DO WE SAY DOGE DALLAS? AND WE'LL ALL FIND OUT TOGETHER WHAT IT MEANS AND WHERE THE WASTE AND FRAUD IS. THAT MUST BE CUT TO ENSURE SAFETY FOR OUR FAMILIES. AND OUR OFFICERS ALWAYS COME FIRST. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. DAMIEN LEVECK. [00:20:52] GOOD MORNING, MR. MAYOR. I'D LIKE TO REQUEST THAT I HAVE THE FULL COUNCIL'S ATTENTION FOR THIS, FOR MY TALK. MY NAME IS DAMIEN LEVECK. I AM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF DALLAS HERO AND I LIVE IN DISTRICT 11. Y'ALL, IT'S TIME FOR HONESTY. IT'S TIME FOR RESPONSIBILITY. IT'S TIME FOR TRANSPARENCY. THE PASSAGE OF PROP U WAS A REFERENDUM ON PUBLIC SAFETY. RESIDENTS DEMANDED COPS SALARIES BE IN THE TOP FIVE IN THE REGION. SO WHY AREN'T YOU TAKING THEM SERIOUSLY? WHEN JACK IRELAND RELEASED THE FIRST DRAFT OF THE FISCAL YEAR 25-26 BUDGET, HE CLAIMED DPD STARTING SALARIES WOULD BE IN THE TOP THREE, BUT HE ONLY GOT THERE BY PADDING THE NUMBERS WITH STIPENDS LIKE BILINGUAL AND EDUCATION PAY THAT NOT EVERY OFFICER IS ELIGIBLE FOR. THAT'S NOT BASE PAY AND YOU GUYS KNOW IT. EVEN WORSE, HIS CLAIM WAS BASED ON OUTDATED DATA FROM A MARCH SALARY SURVEY OF SURROUNDING POLICE DEPARTMENTS BASED ON THE CURRENT DATA. HIS PROPOSED $81,232 BASE PAY PUTS DALLAS 12TH, NOT THIRD. IT'S TIME FOR HONESTY. DALLAS HERO FILED OPEN RECORDS REQUEST FOR THAT SALARY SURVEY, AND THE CITY SAID IT DIDN'T EXIST YET. IT'S REQUIRED BY THE CHARTER. SO WHY ISN'T THIS MADE PUBLICLY AVAILABLE ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE? WHY ARE WE PLAYING GAMES WITH CITIZENS INSTEAD OF BEING OPEN AND HONEST. IT'S TIME FOR TRANSPARENCY. IF YOU TRULY SHARE THE DALLAS RESIDENTS CONCERN ABOUT PUBLIC SAFETY, YOU'LL FIND THE MONEY TO MAKE DALLAS POLICE THE HIGHEST PAID IN NORTH TEXAS. AND YES, THAT MEANS BUDGET CUTS. THE CITY WASTES HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ON CONSULTANTS, DEVELOPER INCENTIVES, LUXURIES THAT WE CANNOT AFFORD WHILE WE'RE DROWNING IN DEBT. IT'S TIME FOR RESPONSIBILITY. IN CLOSING, I CHALLENGE EACH ONE OF YOU TO FOLLOW YOUR COLLEAGUE'S LEAD. DRAFT MEMOS TO THE CITY MANAGER PROPOSING YOUR OWN BOLD BUDGET CUTS. CUTS ARE ALWAYS GOING TO AFFECT SOMEBODY. BUT BEING IN LEADERSHIP MEANS MAKING TOUGH DECISIONS. DO WHAT'S RIGHT FOR THE CITY. MAKE PUBLIC SAFETY A TOP PRIORITY. THE DALLAS RESIDENTS DEMAND IT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MICHAEL KING HAS CANCELED. DOUG SISLER HAS CANCELED. CHARLES MONCRIEF. MY NAME IS CHARLES MONCRIEF AND I LIVE AT 9010 CALICO DRIVE, DALLAS IN DISTRICT 10. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY. PREVIOUSLY, A DISTRICT 9 COUNCILWOMAN PITCHED THE TOXIC PHRASE, REIMAGINING PUBLIC SAFETY. SHE, AND PROBABLY MANY OF THE REST OF YOU OBVIOUSLY DON'T CARE THAT WE WANT RESULTS AND NOT WORD GAMES. WE DO WANT RESULTS. THE REALITY IS SIMPLE. EVEN THOUGH YOU HAVE OBFUSCATED IT, RESPONSE TIMES ARE TOO HIGH. CRIME IS TOO HIGH. OFFICER STAFFING IS TOO LOW AND PAY IS TOO LOW. PROPOSITION U GAVE YOU A ROADMAP. TOP FIVE. PAY 4000 OFFICERS AND HALF OF NEW REVENUE DEDICATED TO PUBLIC SAFETY. INSTEAD OF FOLLOWING THE LAW, WE'VE WATCHED YOU PLAYING WORD GAMES, COUNTING STIPENDS AS SALARY. SHORTCHANGING PENSIONS AND ALLOCATING BARELY HALF OF WHAT'S REQUIRED. IF YOU NEED MONEY. CUT SOMEWHERE ELSE. CUT UNTIL YOU FIND THE DOLLARS. BUT DON'T SHORTCHANGE PUBLIC SAFETY. DALLAS VOTERS DEMAND REAL INVESTMENT AND NOT REIMAGINING. [00:25:02] THIS IS YOUR CHOICE. YOU CAN KEEP REIMAGINING EXCUSES, OR YOU CAN REIMAGINE DALLAS AS A CITY THAT FINALLY HONORS ITS COMMITMENTS. THE VOTERS, PASSED PROPOSITION U TO END EXPERIMENTS AND TO RESTORE ACCOUNTABILITY. IF YOU WANT THE PEOPLE TO BELIEVE THAT YOU VALUE PUBLIC SAFETY, THEN PLEASE STOP PLAYING GAMES AND START DELIVERING. LISTEN TO THE VOTERS. RESPECT THE CHARTER AND COMPLY WITH THE LAW. ANYTHING ELSE? ANYTHING LESS IS A BETRAYAL. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. THIS CONCLUDES YOUR FIRST FIVE REGISTERED SPEECHES. MR. MAYOR, I MOVE TO SUSPEND THE RULES AND ALLOW THE ADDITIONAL SPEAKERS. SECOND. IS THERE ANY OBJECTION? HEARING NONE, MR. MAYOR. JUST DALLAS SPEAKERS, PLEASE. OKAY, SO THE MOTION WAS TO SUSPEND THE RULES. TO MY MOTION WAS TO ALLOW ALL THE SPEAKERS. ALL OF THEM. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. IS THERE ANY OBJECTION TO THAT? OKAY. THERE IS OBJECTION. SO WE NEED TO VOTE. THE MOTION THAT WE'RE VOTING ON IS TO ALLOW ALL OF THE SPEAKERS, NOT MERELY THE DALLAS ONES, BUT ALL OF THE SPEAKERS. MADAM SECRETARY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, WILL YOU PLEASE STATE. YES, IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR? NO. IF YOU'RE OPPOSED. COUNCIL MEMBER WEST IS ABSENT. OH. I'M SORRY. COUNCIL MEMBER WEST. I'M A YES. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER GRACEY. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER JOHNSON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER RESENDEZ. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER CADENA. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER BLAIR. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER BLACKMON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER STEWART. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER ROTH. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY. YES. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM WILLIS. YES. MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO. YES. MAYOR JOHNSON. YES. WITH ALL 15 MEMBERS OF COUNCIL VOTING IN FAVOR, THE MOTION PASSES. MR. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT, WE'LL HEAR THEM ALL. LET'S GO AHEAD. THANK YOU, YOUR NEXT SPEAKER WILL BE SAM WILLIAMS. SAM WILLIAMS IS VIRTUAL. YOU MAY CONTINUE. HELLO. MY NAME IS SAM WILLIAMS, AND I LIVE IN DISTRICT 9, BUT I WAS RAISED IN AND CAME UP THROUGH THE DISD SYSTEM IN DISTRICT 11. MY FAMILY STILL LIVES THERE. I SEE IT AS A SECOND HOME DISTRICT. I'VE NEVER FELT MORE DISAPPOINTED AS A CONSTITUENT OF MY LOCAL GOVERNMENT. AND FRANKLY, AFTER TODAY, A COMMUNITY I IDENTIFY WITH THAT WHEN THE DALLAS OBSERVER REPORTED ON SUGGESTIONS COMING FROM THAT DISTRICT TO DRASTICALLY UNDERMINE DALLAS OPERATIONS. THE FOUNDATIONAL STRUCTURE OF OUR DALLAS BUDGET INCLUDES SAFE, VIBRANT, GROWING, LIVABLE, AND SUSTAINABLE. TO THEN QUESTION THE NEED FOR OFFICES LIKE POLICE OVERSIGHT, ETHICS AND COMPLIANCE, PUBLIC ART, AFFORDABLE HOUSING, COMMUNITY CARE, AND CULTURAL SERVICES, AMONG OTHERS IS AT BEST MISGUIDED. TO DO THIS UNDER THE UMBRELLA OF FISCALLY SOUND AND RESPONSIBLE, HAS CLEARLY NOT TAKEN LESSONS FROM THE WORLD IN WHICH WE LIVE, WHERE MASSIVE, ABRUPT REDUCTIONS IN THE WORKFORCE PRECEDE NEGATIVE FINANCIAL OUTCOMES IN THE AREAS IN WHICH THOSE REDUCTIONS TAKE PLACE. TO COMPLETELY DISMANTLE THE DEPARTMENTS THROUGH WHICH DALLAS SIGNALS ITS ASPIRATION TO BE A WORLD CLASS CITY, THAT WE HOPE PEOPLE WILL VISIT DURING THE WORLD CUP AND PICTURE THEMSELVES LIVING IN SHOWS TO ME THAT WE ARE NOT SERIOUS ABOUT WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE IN OUR CITY. NOT TO MENTION, I HOPE TO HAVE A FEW MORE DECADES HERE AT LEAST. I'VE ALSO LIVED IN A FEW DISTRICTS THROUGHOUT MY 32 YEARS AS A DALLAS RESIDENT. THIS BUDGET TOWN HALL SEASON, I'VE BEEN TO PRESENTATIONS IN DISTRICTS 1, 07, 9, 10, AND 14. I CAN SAY WITH CONFIDENCE IN NONE OF THESE PRESENTATIONS WAS INCREASING POLICE OFFICER HEADCOUNT THE PRIMARY CONCERN OF RESIDENTS, WHAT WAS A PRIMARY TOPIC IN THESE TOWN HALLS WAS THE IMPACT OF PROP U AND DALLAS HERO TO THE GENERAL FUND, AND HOW IT NEGATIVELY IMPACTS PROGRAMS. RESIDENTS ARE EXCITED ABOUT VISION ZERO, KEEPING OUR COMMUNITY POOLS AND LIBRARIES, OUR CLIMATE PLAN IN TAMKO, MLK REVITALIZATION. OUR TOP TWO PRIORITIES IN BOTH THE CITY WIDE SURVEY AND IN DISCUSSIONS WERE INFRASTRUCTURE AND SOLUTIONS FOR THE UNHOUSED. MY POINT BEING, NONE OF THESE ARE POLICING ISSUES UNLESS YOU'RE GOING TO ARREST A POTHOLE. [00:30:02] I DIDN'T HEAR ONE PERSON ASK THAT WE TAKE MORE MONEY AWAY FROM BIKE LANES, LIBRARIES OR POOLS. A REMINDER FOR ALL THAT VIOLENT CRIME IS ALSO DOWN IN DALLAS OVER YEARS. BUT SOMETHING I'LL SAY IS WHAT I DID SEE IN ALL THESE DISTRICTS, AND WHAT I'M HEARING FROM MY PEERS IN OTHER DISTRICTS, IS A DESIRE OF RESIDENTS TO HAVE COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT ARE REIMAGINING SAFETY AND ARE REIMAGINING WHAT OUR CITY SHOULD BE. MORE STRONGLY NOW THAN EVER DO WE WANT TO BE PROUD OF OUR LEADERS. BUDGETS AREN'T JUST AUSTERITY MEASURES AFTER AUSTERITY MEASURES. THEY ARE A CHANCE FOR REINVESTMENT AND REALLOCATION TO MOVE TOWARDS A MORE. THAT'S YOUR TIME, THANK YOU. ANDREA LUTTRELL. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS ANDREA LUTTRELL AND I LIVE AT 7132 ECHO DRIVE BLUFF IN DALLAS IN DISTRICT 11. TO START, I WANT TO THANK THE COUNCIL FOR RUNNING FOR OFFICE AND GOVERNING IN THE AGE OF SOCIAL MEDIA. IT'S A FRAUGHT UNDERTAKING, AND I APPRECIATE EACH OF YOU FOR OPTING TO SERVE IN A HIGHLY POLITICIZED AND DIVISIVE TIME. I COME TODAY AS A DEEPLY CONCERNED CITIZEN. I'M A FIFTH GENERATION TEXAN, AND FOR MOST OF THE LAST CENTURY, DALLAS HAS BEEN OUR FAMILY HOME. MY PARENTS SAW THE CITY GROW INTO THE CULTURAL AND BUSINESS POWERHOUSE WE SEE TODAY. I WANT MY GRANDCHILDREN TO EXPERIENCE THE THRIVING DALLAS, BUILT BY COUNTLESS PEOPLE WHO PUT THE CITY'S WELL-BEING ABOVE POLITICS. I WAS FRANKLY HORRIFIED TO READ OF MY REPRESENTATIVE'S PROPOSED BUDGET CUTS, AND THAT THIS BUDGET CUT WAS NOT MADE IN THE CORRECT PROCEDURAL MANNER, BUT IN A ONE OFF MEMO TO THE CITY MANAGER. AS A FORMER TEACHER AND CURRENT NONPROFIT FUNDRAISER FOCUSED ON EDUCATION AND PUBLIC HEALTH, I AM WELL VERSED IN THE EFFORTS OF PRIVATE CITIZENS AND FOUNDATIONS FUNDING SOCIAL SERVICES FOR THE GOOD OF OUR COMMUNITY. THIS MEMOS PROPOSAL TO CUT DALLAS CULTURAL CENTER'S, PUBLIC ARTS FUNDING, MONEY FOR THIRD SPACES, SUCH AS SOUTHERN STATES, AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND ECONOMIC MOBILITY, ARE ALARMING AND SHORTSIGHTED. CORPORATIONS RELOCATE TO DALLAS BECAUSE OF OUR DIVERSE AND RICH CULTURE. OF COURSE, WE ALL WANT A BALANCED BUDGET AND THAT FOCUSES ON THE NEEDS OF DALLAS. WE NEED INFRASTRUCTURE, MAINTENANCE AND FUNDING FOR OUR POLICE FORCE AND FIREFIGHTERS. WE ALSO NEED TO THINK OF THE LONG TERM HEALTH OF OUR CITY, AND SERVE AS AN EXAMPLE FOR CLIMATE ACTION THAT WILL PROTECT US AND OUR CHILDREN. WE NEED AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND ECONOMIC MOBILITY INITIATIVES. THESE ARE CRIME PREVENTION MEASURES, NOT EXTRAS. SADLY, WE NEED AN OVERSIGHT AND ETHICS NOW MORE THAN EVER. REFORM IS LAUDABLE. THROWING THE BABY OUT WITH THE BATHWATER IS NOT. THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS QUOTED THE MEMO WRITTEN BY THE D11 FRESHMEN, SAYING THAT CUTS MAKE ORGANIZATIONS FOCUS ON SUSTAINABILITY AND INNOVATION. TO BE CLEAR, NONPROFITS ALREADY DO THIS. GIVEN FEDERAL AND STATE CUTS COMBINED WITH INFLATION AND ECONOMIC HARDSHIPS. NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS STRUGGLE TO FIND THE FUNDING THEY NEED AND DESERVE. IT IS NOT THE DUTY OF PRIVATE CITIZEN AND FOUNDATIONS TO ENTIRELY FUND OUR PUBLIC SERVICES. MANY FOUNDATIONS ARE ALREADY AT CAPACITY, AND THOUGH WE ARE BLESSED WITH RESIDENTS WHO WILL AND DO GIVE AMOUNTS BOTH LARGE AND SMALL TO THE ARTS AND TO ALLEVIATE SOCIAL WOES. TO RELY SOLELY ON THEM AS UNREALISTIC. THEY ARE CITIZENS, NOT ATMS. I WANT MY TAXES TO FUND PUBLIC SERVICES WE NEED AND USE. I'D LIKE TO REMIND THE FRESHMAN FROM DAM. WE DO NOT NEED A GOVERNMENT TO BE PUSHED BY A WAVE OF POLITIZATION, WE NEED TO BALANCE THE BUDGET AND PLAN FOR THE FUTURE. YOU ARE IN THE SERVICE OF THE PEOPLE ELECTED YOU, NOT IN THE SERVICE OF THE MONEYED INTERESTS THAT MAY HAVE GOTTEN YOU ELECTED. PLEASE THINK OF ALL OF THE RESIDENTS OF DALLAS AND HOW TO KEEP OUR CITY STRONG FOR EVERYONE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I JUST WANT TO REMIND EVERYONE, I DO UNDERSTAND YOUR ENTHUSIASM FOR THE TOPICS THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE DEBATING TODAY, BUT WE DON'T ACTUALLY ALLOW FOR OUTBURSTS AND RESPONSIVE BEHAVIOR BY THE CROWD. SO THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE TODAY, BUT WE ACTUALLY ASK YOU TO REFRAIN FROM THAT. SO GO AHEAD, MADAM SECRETARY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. JULIE KAUFMAN. OKAY. GOOD MORNING EVERYONE. MY NAME IS JULIE KAUFMAN. I LIVE AT 9410 HILLVIEW AND DISTRICT 10. EVERYWHERE YOU LOOK, THE COST OF LIVING IN DALLAS HAS GONE UP. FAMILIES ARE PAYING MORE FOR GROCERIES, UTILITIES AND HOUSING. PEOPLE ARE STRETCHED THIN, AND AT TIMES LIKE THIS, THE CITY SHOULD BE FINDING WAYS TO EASE THE BURDEN, NOT ADD TO IT. THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING YOU TO ADOPT THE NO-NEW-REVENUE TAX RATE. [00:35:04] THIS RATE DOES NOT NEED TO CUT CITY SERVICES. IT SIMPLY MEANS OUR TAXPAYERS WON'T PAY MORE JUST BECAUSE PROPERTY VALUES ARE INCREASING. IT PROTECTS HOMEOWNERS, RENTERS AND SMALL BUSINESSES FROM HIGHER BILLS AND ALLOWS FAMILIES TO KEEP MORE OF THEIR HARD EARNED MONEY IN THEIR POCKET. OTHER MAJOR CITIES HAVE ALREADY MANAGED WITH LOWER TAX RATES. HOUSTON AT $0.51. SAN ANTONIO AT .55. OUR SUBURBS FRISCO .42, PLANO AT .44, MCKINNEY AT .45 ARE ALL THRIVING WITH LOWER RATES. DALLAS SHOULD BE COMPETITIVE, NOT AN OUTLIER WITH ONE OF THE HIGHEST RATES IN THE STATE. WE ALL KNOW WHAT HAPPENS WHEN TAXES RISE FASTER THAN WAGES. FAMILIES MOVE OUT, BUSINESSES INVEST ELSEWHERE, AND GROWTH STALLS. THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE SEEING. IF YOU LOOK AT POPULATION SINCE 2020, FORT WORTH HAS GROWN 10%, MCKINNEY 10%, FRISCO 16, SAN ANTONIO 16. YET DALLAS POPULATION HAS BARELY MOVED. WHY CAN OUR NEIGHBORS GROW, ATTRACT FAMILIES, AND DELIVER STRONG SERVICES WITH LOWER TAX RATES WHILE DALLAS STRUGGLES? THE ANSWER ISN'T TO KEEP RAISING TAXES, IT'S TO SET PRIORITIES. HOUSEHOLDS DO THIS EVERY DAY. THEY BUDGET, THEY MAKE CHOICES, AND THEY LIVE WITHIN THEIR MEANS. THE CITY MUST DO THE SAME. CORE SERVICES LIKE PUBLIC SAFETY, INFRASTRUCTURE, PARKS SHOULD ALWAYS COME FIRST. AFFORDABILITY IS SOMETHING WE ALL SAY WE WANT, AND I'VE HEARD EVERY SINGLE PERSON UP HERE SAY THAT. THIS IS THE MOMENT TO PROVE IT. SHOW TAXPAYERS YOU HEAR THEM AND ADOPT THE NO-NEW-REVENUE RATE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NATALIE LEVECK. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS NATALIE LEVECK. I LIVE IN DISTRICT 11. BORN AND RAISED IN DISTRICT 11. RAISING MY THREE KIDS THERE. SO LET'S START WITH THE NUMBERS WE JUST HEARD. HOUSTON'S PROPERTY TAX RATE IS $0.52. SAN ANTONIO'S IS .54. FORT WORTH IS .67 AND OUR SUBURBS ARE EVEN LOWER. PLANO .44, FRISCO .42 AND MCKINNEY AT .45. AND THEN THERE'S DALLAS, $0.70, THE HIGHEST AMONG MAJOR TEXAS CITIES. SO LET ME ASK YOU, COMPARED TO THOSE CITIES, DO WE HAVE FASTER POLICE RESPONSE TIME? DO OUR STREETS FEEL BETTER MAINTAINED WITH FEWER POTHOLES? IS IT MORE AFFORDABLE TO RAISE A FAMILY HERE. SADLY, WE HAVE TO ADMIT THAT THE ANSWER TO THAT IS NO. DALLAS TAXPAYERS ARE PAYING MORE AND GETTING LESS. THAT IS NOT SUSTAINABLE AND IS ALSO NOT FAIR. THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING YOU TODAY TO ADOPT A NO-NEW-REVENUE RATE. AND DOING SO DOESN'T MEAN CUTTING SERVICES. IT MEANS REFUSING TO TAKE MORE MONEY FROM RESIDENTS JUST BECAUSE THEIR APPRAISALS WENT UP. IT MEANS RENTERS ARE NOT FORCED TO ABSORB HIGHER RENTS BECAUSE LANDLORDS ARE HIT WITH BIGGER TAX BILLS. AND IT MEANS FAMILIES KEEP MORE OF THEIR HARD EARNED PAYCHECKS INSTEAD OF WATCHING THEM BLEED AWAY AT CITY HALL. IF HOUSTON, SAN ANTONIO, FORT WORTH AND OUR SUBURBS CAN THRIVE WITH LOWER TAX RATES, THERE IS NO REASON THAT DALLAS CAN'T AS WELL. WE SHOULD NOT REMAIN THE OUTLIER WITH THE HIGHEST RATE AND WEAKEST RESULTS. IF DALLAS TRULY WANTS TO GROW, AND I THINK WE ALL WANT IT TO ATTRACT NEW FAMILIES AND STAY COMPETITIVE, IT MUST STOP ASKING MORE FROM THE VERY PEOPLE WHO MAKE THE CITY WORK. LET'S RESPECT TAXPAYERS, MAKE TOUGH CHOICES AND ADOPT A NO NEW REVENUE RATE. SHOW US THAT YOU VALUE OUR TRUST AND FRANKLY, SHOW US THAT YOU VALUE OUR PAYCHECKS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. DIANE BENJAMIN. GOOD MORNING, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS. MY NAME IS DIANE BENJAMIN. I RESIDE AT 6530 WAGNER DRIVE, DALLAS, TEXAS, AND I'M IN DISTRICT 13. I ALSO SERVED ON THE COUNCIL, IN THE CWEB, CRIME WATCH EXECUTIVE BOARD FOR NORTH CENTRAL FOR MANY YEARS UNDER CHIEF CLEEK [00:40:10] AND CHIEF KUNKLE, AND ENJOYED THE NAME AS PRIVATE BENJAMIN, AFFECTIONATELY CALLED BY MANY OF THE POLICE OFFICERS. WE ARE A FIRST CLASS CITY. WE DESERVE A FIRST CLASS POLICE DEPARTMENT. FOR MANY YEARS. IT LOOKS LIKE OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT HAS GONE ON THE DECLINE BECAUSE WE ARE GASLIGHTING. AND GASLIGHTING WILL NOT WORK ON THE RESIDENTS OF DALLAS. YOU CAN SAY ABOVE AND BEYOND ALL YOU WANT. YOU CAN CHERRY PICK STIPENDS, BUT RESIDENTS CAN SEE WITH THEIR OWN EYES THAT THIS BUDGET DOES NOT COMPLY WITH PROPOSITION U. WE ARE SMART, WE ARE PLUGGED IN AND WE ARE NOT FOOLED. STARTING PAY IS 12TH, NOT THE TOP THREE. FUNDING IS 58 MILLION, NOT THE 111 MILLION THAT THE LAW REQUIRES. STAFFING IS STAGNANT, NOT CLIMBING TOWARDS 4000. THOSE ARE FACTS, PLAIN AND UNDENIABLE. THE PUBLIC VOTED OVERWHELMINGLY FOR PROPOSITION U. THAT WAS A MANDATE, NOT A SUGGESTION. THEY WANTED COMPETITIVE PAY. THEY WANTED STAFFING LEVELS THAT WOULD BE ACTUALLY REDUCE CRIME. THEY WANTED HALF OF THE NEW REVENUE DEDICATED TO PUBLIC SAFETY, BECAUSE FOR TOO LONG THE CITY SPENT MONEY ON EVERYTHING ELSE WHILE CRIME GREW WORSE. THAT IS THE REALITY THE VOTERS ARE ADDRESSING. YOU CAN TRY TO SPIN THIS, BUT IN THE END, THERE ARE ONLY TWO CHOICES. EITHER YOU COMPLY WITH PROPOSITION U OR YOU BETRAY THE PEOPLE WHO PASSED IT. EITHER YOU PAY OFFICERS FAIRLY AND MEET THE CHARTER REQUIREMENTS, OR YOU SEND ANOTHER GENERATION OF RECRUITS TRAINED AT A TAX PAPER, TAXPAYER EXPENSE OUT THE DOOR TO OTHER CITIES WHO WILL PAY THEM MORE. COUNCIL MEMBERS. THIS IS YOUR MOMENT. THAT'S YOUR TIME. THIS IS YOUR MOMENT. PLEASE DON'T FAIL. LET US SUPPORT OUR POLICE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. SERENA NOLAN. SERENA NOLAN IS NOT PRESENT. JANET MARIANI. HELLO, I'M JANET MARIANI. I LIVE IN DISTRICT 11. LET ME BE BLUNT. WE ARE DONE BEING LIED TO. WE ARE DONE BEING TALKED DOWN TO. YOU SAY ABOVE AND BEYOND UNTIL YOUR MICROPHONES CRACKLE. BUT THIS COMMUNITY ISN'T BLIND, AND WE KNOW EXACTLY WHAT PROPOSITION U DEMANDS. YOU DIDN'T MEET IT. NOT EVEN CLOSE. YOU GAVE 58 MILLION. THE LAW SAYS 111 MILLION. STARTING PAY RANKS 12TH WHEN VOTERS WERE PROMISED TOP THREE. OFFICER STAFFING IS STUCK IN NEUTRAL WHILE OUR POPULATION, OUR CRIME GROWS. THAT'S NOT EXCELLENCE, THAT'S FAILURE. MAYBE THE NATIONAL GUARD CAN REIMAGINE DALLAS. NOW, I WANT TO REMIND EVERY PERSON IN THIS ROOM WHAT PROPOSITION U REALLY WAS. IT WASN'T A VOTE. IT WAS A LOUD, CLEAR, CITYWIDE PLEA FOR SAFETY. IT WAS FAMILIES SAYING ENOUGH. ENOUGH WITH THE RISING CRIME. ENOUGH WITH UNDERPAID OFFICERS. ENOUGH WITH THE GAMES. HALF OF ALL NEW REVENUE. THAT'S WHAT PROP U MANDATES. NOT SOME, NOT LATER HALF. BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE TIRED OF WATCHING MILLIONS GO TO PET PROJECTS WHILE POLICE DEPARTMENTS CRUMBLE. DALLAS SHOULD BE LEADING THE NATION. AND INSTEAD OF DOING THE RIGHT THING, INSTEAD IT'S BECOME AN EMBARRASSMENT. YOU HAD A CLEAR CHOICE FOLLOW THE LAW OR FIND EXCUSES. [00:45:04] YOU CHOSE SPIN OVER SERVICE. WELL, NOW YOU'VE GOT ANOTHER CHOICE. FIX IT OR FACE US AGAIN AT THE BALLOT BOX. AND WE MEAN BUSINESS. Y'ALL CAN WATCH ME. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBERS. WE DON'T WANT EMPTY WORDS. WE WANT ACTION. WE WANT OUR OFFICERS PAID WHAT THEY'RE WORTH. WE WANT OUR COMMUNITIES PROTECTED. WE WANT THE LAW WE PASSED TO BE RESPECTED. THIS ISN'T OPTIONAL. THIS ISN'T FLEXIBLE. THIS IS YOUR LEGAL AND MORAL OBLIGATION. DO YOUR JOB. BECAUSE IF YOU TURN YOUR BACKS ON PROP U, YOU'RE NOT JUST BREAKING A PROMISE, YOU'RE BETRAYING A CITY THAT ASKED YOU TO STAND UP FOR WHAT'S RIGHT. DALLAS DESERVES BETTER. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. JOHN BOTEFUHR. GOOD MORNING, MR. MAYOR. I'M JOHN BOTEFUHR. 10119 EL PESCADO, DISTRICT 2. I HAD SOMETHING ELSE TO READ, BUT I JUST GOT A CALL FROM MY MORTGAGE COMPANY THAT I DIDN'T PAY ENOUGH ON MY LAST MONTH'S BILL. WHEN I CALLED THE FINANCE COMPANY ASKING WHY IT WENT UP, THEY TOLD ME IT WAS DUE TO THE INCREASE IN PROPERTY TAXES. I'M NOT A BIG EXPERT ON BIG REALTY, BUT I DO KNOW WHAT IT FEELS LIKE NOW TO SEND IN MORE MONEY THAN I DID THE MONTH BEFORE BECAUSE OF PROPERTY TAXES. AND I WONDER IF WE'RE TRULY GETTING OUR MONEY'S WORTH. IT FEELS LIKE WE'RE PAYING A LOT. FROM WHAT I JUST HEARD, MORE THAN FOLKS IN OTHER BIG CITIES, IN FACT. BUT OUR STREETS AREN'T GETTING FIXED ANY FASTER. WHITE ROCK LAKE STILL ISN'T DREDGED, AND LIVING HERE DOESN'T SEEM TO BE GETTING ANY EASIER. WE'RE ALWAYS TOLD THIS TIME OF YEAR THERE ISN'T ENOUGH MONEY FOR EVERYTHING WE NEED. AND THAT'S DEEPLY CONCERNING BECAUSE WE KEEP PAYING HIGHER TAX BILLS. BUT MY PLEA TO YOU IS STRAIGHTFORWARD. WE NEED A BUDGET THAT DOESN'T ASK LOYAL DALLAS RESIDENTS FOR A SINGLE PENNY. MORE ON OUR TAX BILLS THIS YEAR. INSTEAD OF RAISING TAXES LET'S FOCUS ON HOW THE CITY SPENDS THE MONEY IT ALREADY COLLECTS. THERE ARE IDEAS OUT THERE TO MAKE OUR GOVERNMENT SMARTER AND MORE EFFICIENT. IDEAS LIKE TRIMMING OR CUTTING PROGRAMS THAT OTHER ORGANIZATIONS AND OTHER ENTITIES ALREADY HAVE, OR THAT AREN'T TRULY ESSENTIAL MAINTENANCE WORK. WE NEED TO SCRUTINIZE PROGRAMS AND ASK, IS THIS SOMETHING ONLY OUR CITY CAN DO? IS IT A TOP PRIORITY? SHOULD IT BE FUNDED BY PRIVATE DONATIONS? WE ARE, AFTER ALL, ONE OF THE MOST PHILANTHROPIC CITIES IN THE COUNTRY, OR OUR COUNTY OR FEDERAL PROGRAMS ALREADY COVERING IT. AND IF NOT, PERHAPS WE NEED STRONGER LOBBYING EFFORTS FROM THE CITY TO MAKE THEM ACCOUNTABLE. BY MAKING PRUDENT CHOICES AND FINDING WAYS TO BE MORE EFFICIENT WE CAN FREE UP FUNDS FOR WHAT MATTERS MOST, KEEPING OUR NEIGHBORHOODS SAFE WITH ROBUST POLICE AND FIRE SERVICES, REPAIRING OUR AGING ROADS AND INFRASTRUCTURE, SUPPORTING OUR PARKS, AND MAYBE EVEN PROVIDING SOME PROPERTY TAX RELIEF. LET'S SHOW OUR CITY GOVERNMENT THAT CAN LIVE WITHIN ITS MEANS, JUST LIKE US NOW FAMILIES DO EVERY DAY. LET'S MAKE DALLAS A PLACE WHERE WE FEEL WE'RE GETTING MORE VALUE, NOT LESS WITHOUT FACING A HIGHER TAX. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. BERLE GEORGE. I NEED A BOX. YOU CAN LOWER THAT PODIUM. MR. LEVECK RAISED THAT PODIUM, AND IT'S HIS FAULT. OH, THAT'S ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. MY NAME IS BERLE GEORGE. I LIVE IN DISTRICT 11 FOR THE PAST 16 YEARS. I WANT TO THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR SERVICE TO OUR COMMUNITY AND TO THE RESIDENTS. WHEN FAMILIES SIT DOWN AND THEY START TO DO THEIR BUDGET FOR THEIR LIFE, THEY DON'T GET TO PASS ALONG COST TO SOMEONE ELSE. THEY MAKE HARD CHOICES. THEY MAKE SACRIFICES, THEY TAKE CUTS, AND THEY FIND A WAY TO LIVE WITHIN THEIR MEANS. AND THAT IS BOTH PRUDENT AND RESPONSIBLE WHEN THE CITY RAISES THE TAX RATE ABOVE THE NO NEW REVENUE LEVEL, IT DOES THE OPPOSITE. IT TELLS TAXPAYERS YOU PAY MORE BECAUSE YOUR PROPERTY VALUE HAS INCREASED. NOW, WHAT COULD HAPPEN IN SITUATIONS LIKE THAT, YOU CAN PRICE PEOPLE OUT OF THEIR HOMES IN THOSE SITUATIONS. SO THEN PEOPLE START KIND OF LOOKING AROUND AT OTHER MUNICIPALITIES AND THEY THINK, WELL, HEY, IT'S CHEAPER TO GO LIVE OVER HERE, SO I HAVE BETTER SAVINGS, AND ALSO THEN BUSINESSES START DOING THE SAME. YOU START LOSING JOBS, YOU LOSE INVESTMENT, YOU LOSE GROWTH, AND THEN YOU LOSE THE WELL-BEING OF OUR COMMUNITY. [00:50:02] WE DON'T HAVE TO WONDER IF THIS IS GOING TO HAPPEN. IT IS HAPPENING. PEOPLE FEEL SAFER IN OTHER COMMUNITIES. THEY RELOCATE BECAUSE IT'S ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE FOR THEM TO DO SO. THE CITY HAS A CHOICE, THEY CAN EITHER DISRESPECT THE TAXPAYER AND WATCH THEM RELOCATE. OR THEY CAN PROVE TO DALLAS THAT THEY VALUE ITS RESIDENTS BY LIVING WITHIN ITS MEANS. ADOPTING A NO-NEW-REVENUE RATE IS THE FAIR AND RESPONSIBLE CHOICE. IT SHOWS THAT YOU VALUE THE RESIDENTS, YOU VALUE THE BUSINESSES, AND YOU WANT THEM TO STAY IN THIS COMMUNITY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. DOMINIQUE ALEXANDER. GOOD MORNING. DOMINIQUE ALEXANDER. BROTHERS AND SISTERS. COMMUNITIES, FAMILY AND FRIENDS. WE GATHER HERE TODAY NOT JUST AS INDIVIDUALS, BUT AS PEOPLE BOUND TOGETHER BY THE HISTORY, BY THE STRUGGLE, BY THE UNSHAKABLE PROMISE THAT JUSTICE BELONG TO US ALL. WE LOOK AT A CITY, THE CITY I WAS BORN AND RAISED, THE SACRIFICES OF THOSE WHO COME BEFORE US, THE MEN AND WOMEN WHO RISKED IT ALL SO THAT WE COULD STAND HERE WITH DIGNITY. I THINK OUR CIVIL RIGHTS FATHERS AND MOTHERS, THOSE WHO MARCHED, THOSE WHO WERE JAILED, THOSE WHO WERE BEATEN, EVEN GIVEN THEIR LIVES SO THAT DALLAS SO THAT AMERICA COULD BE AN INCH CLOSER TO FREEDOM. AND I SAY TODAY, I WILL NOT ALLOW THEIR SACRIFICE TO GO IN VAIN. BECAUSE WHILE MOST PEOPLE ARE SHOWING THEIR TRUE COLORS IN THIS MOMENT, WHILE THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION IN WASHINGTON EMBRACES DIVISION, HATRED AND BIGOTRY, HERE IN DALLAS, SOME WOULD DARE TO FOLLOW SUIT. SOME WOULD DARE STRIP AWAY THE CRITICAL PROGRESS, DISMANTLE OVERSIGHT, CUT PROGRAMS THAT SERVE VULNERABLE, AND CALL IT FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY. LET ME BE CLEAR. I REFUSE TO ALLOW THE CITY OF DALLAS TO FALL TO TYRANNY. I REFUSE TO ALLOW MY ANCESTORS TO BE DISHONORED ON MY WATCH. WHEN I COME AFTER MOST VULNERABLE COMMUNITIES, YOU ARE COMING AFTER US ALL. WHEN YOU TRY TO CUT PROGRAMS THAT WELCOME IMMIGRANTS, THAT PROVIDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, THAT BRING OVERSIGHT AND ACCOUNTABILITY INTO POLICING. YOU ARE NOT JUST CUTTING A LINE IN A BUDGET, YOU ARE CUTTING THE HEART OF JUSTICE ITSELF. AND YET, AT THE SAME TIME, WE ARE TOLD THAT THERE IS MONEY FOR POLICING, ALWAYS PUMPING INTO BUDGET THAT NEVER FACE TRUE AUDITS, NEVER FACE ACCOUNTABILITY THAT TAXPAYERS DEMANDED. I AM NOT HERE TO TALK ABOUT OFFICER SALARY, PENSION, HEALTH CARE. I AM TALKING ABOUT THE UNCHECKED ACCESS AND MISMANAGEMENT OF THE POLICE SYSTEM THAT COLLAPSED AGAIN AND AGAIN. AND STILL LEADERS GIVE MORE AND NO QUESTIONS. WE SEE IT. WE SEE THE FOOLISHNESS, THE HIDDEN AGENDAS, THE BACKDOOR DEALS, THE SO-CALLED MODERATES SHOWING TRUE COLORS AND TELL YOU WE ARE NOT FALLING FOR ANY OF IT. THE PEOPLE OF DALLAS IS AWAKE. WE ARE ALERT. WE ARE MOBILIZED. THE NEXT GENERATION ACTION NETWORK WILL NOT STOP. WE WILL NOT STAND SILENT. WE WILL NOT SIT BACK WHILE PROGRESS IS DISMANTLED. WE WILL MARCH. WE WILL ORGANIZE. WE WILL RAISE OUR VOICES UNTIL THE ECHOES OF THE CORNERS OF THIS CITY. WE WILL NOT ALLOW THE CITY OF DALLAS TO YET FALL TO HATE BIGOTRY. AND YET PEOPLE THAT DO NOT BELIEVE THAT JUSTICE FOR ALL. WE WILL NOT ALLOW THIS CITY THAT I LOVE TO FALL. THANK YOU, ADAM LAMONT. OKAY ANYWAY. HELLO. GOOD MORNING, GOOD MORNING. HI. MY NAME IS ADAM LAMONT. 9432 AMBERTON PARKWAY. I COME DOWN HERE TO SPEAK IN PART TODAY JUST IN FAVOR OF A BUDGET THAT WORKS FOR ALL OF DALLAS. THAT IS NOT JUST SOMETHING THAT IS POURING MONEY INTO ONE PART OF THE BUDGET, WHICH WILL NOT ACTUALLY MAKE US SAFE. I DO WANT TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT ONE PART OF A SILLY MEMO BY A COUNCIL MEMBER FROM NORTH DALLAS. I DON'T KNOW A LOT ABOUT MANY OF THE TOPICS IN THERE. I DO KNOW A LITTLE BIT ABOUT HOUSING. HIS SUGGESTION OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT, THAT WE ELIMINATE THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT DIVISION BECAUSE IT OVERLAPS WITH DHA [00:55:03] AND TDHCA. IT WAS IGNORANT, IT WAS UNINFORMED. I'M INCLINED TO THINK EVERYTHING ELSE IN THE MEMO IS SIMILARLY LIKE THAT. BECAUSE OF THAT YOU ALL KNOW EVEN, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS, LIKE DISTRICT 12, WHO I DON'T AGREE WITH VERY MUCH, KNOW THAT THERE ARE MANY WAYS, LIKE THE LAND BANK, BOND FUNDS, HOME FUNDS, FUNDS FROM THE MH FEE AND LOU PROGRAM, TIF FUNDS, AND MORE. WHERE THE CITY CREATES AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN WAYS THAT DO NOT OVERLAP WITH DHA AND TDHCA. SO THE AUDACITY OF A FIRST TERM COUNCIL MEMBER OR SOME STAFF MEMBER TO, WHO CLEARLY HAS NO IDEA WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT. IT'S GALLING. WHAT ELSE? OH I SHOULDN'T BE SURPRISED, OF COURSE, THAT A COUNCIL MEMBER IS DOING THIS SINCE HE'S SPENT THE BETTER HALF OF THE PAST FIVE YEARS BLOCKING THE CITY FROM BUILDING DESPERATELY NEEDED AFFORDABLE HOUSING ADJACENT TO HIS OH SO IMPORTANT COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS. ANYWAY, AS FOR THE REST OF YOU, I WANT TO MAKE CLEAR. LET'S GET IT TOGETHER. AND LET'S MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE A BUDGET THAT IS KEEPING VITAL PUBLIC FACILITIES LIKE LIBRARIES OPEN. WE HAVE THE MONEY TO KEEP THEM OPEN. OKAY, LET'S NOT DO A MINIMAL TAX CUT THAT SAVES THE AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD LESS THAN $13, AKA A LITTLE BIT OF CHIPOTLE. JUST SO THAT WE CAN THEN CLOSE UP THE FIVE LIBRARIES. RIGHT. ARE WE GOING TO BE A CITY THAT CLOSES LIBRARIES WHILE POURING MILLIONS MORE INTO THE POLICE AND CUTTING TAXES? IS THIS DALLAS OR IS THIS D.C. COUNCIL MEMBERS, AND I'M NOT TALKING TO ALL OF YOU. WORK IT OUT SO THAT WE CAN KEEP OUR LIBRARIES OPEN SO THAT WE CAN KEEP DALLAS TO BE A VIBRANT CITY THAT IS WELCOMING FOR EVERYBODY, WHETHER THEY HAVE BEEN HERE FOR A DAY OR BEEN HERE FOR GENERATIONS. DALLAS IS ALREADY PAINFULLY SHORT OF BEING A PLACE THAT YOU DON'T NEED TO PAY EVERYWHERE TO GO, AND LIBRARIES SERVE A VITAL PUBLIC FUNCTION. WE NEED THOSE LIBRARIES. WE NEED TO HAVE A STRONG COMMUNITY. I HOPE YOU PASS A BUDGET THAT ALLOWS THAT TO HAPPEN. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. HAVE A GREAT DAY. THANK YOU. DUSTIN HARD. IT'S NOT IN PERSON, NOT ONLINE DUSTIN HARD. IT'S NOT PRESENT. NATHAN SHADDOCK. SHADDOCK. SHADDOCK. HELLO. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR HAVING ME. IT'S MY FIRST TIME HERE. IT'S MY FIRST TIME HERE. I'VE NEVER BEEN INSIDE THIS BUILDING, EVEN THOUGH I'VE LIVED HERE MY ENTIRE LIFE. BUT IT'S KIND OF INTERESTING TO SEE THE SPEECH PATTERNS BEING USED BY MY FELLOW RESIDENTS. A LOT OF ACCUSATIONS BEING MADE OF WORD GAMES BEING PLAYED, WHICH IS KIND OF JUST SILLY. THERE ARE BETTER WAYS TO COMMUNICATE. THERE ARE BETTER WAYS TO ADVOCATE FOR YOUR OWN CAUSES. AND TODAY, I'D LIKE TO ADVOCATE FOR THE CYCLISTS IN DALLAS. AND I. EXCUSE ME. I WAS SENT AN EMAIL LAST NIGHT SAYING THAT AN UPCOMING BUDGET PROPOSAL WOULD THREATEN FUNDING FOR BIKE LANE DEVELOPMENT. AND I FIND THAT UNACCEPTABLE. SO I'M JUST VOICING THAT HERE. I APPRECIATE YOU ALL FOR LISTENING. I HOPE THAT YOU, I HOPE THAT YOU ALL UNDERSTAND THAT PUBLIC SAFETY IS SOMETHING THAT COMES DOWNSTREAM FROM THE ENVIRONMENT THAT WE LIVE IN. IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN ADDRESS DIRECTLY WITH A DOLLAR VALUE. AND THE DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT IS ONE OF THE BEST IN THE COUNTRY. THERE ARE SOME OF THE NICEST PEOPLE, SOME OF THE MOST ACCOMMODATING, AND THEY DO DESERVE THE BEST. BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE SABOTAGE OURSELVES. AND IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE STOOP TO TACTICS THAT ARE BELOW US OR STOOP TO, LIKE, EXCUSE ME. THAT'S BASICALLY ALL I HAVE TO SAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR HAVING ME. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR PROTECTING US. DALLAS, POLICE. YOU GUYS ARE THE BEST SURROUNDING COUNTIES. THEY ALSO ARE GOING TO CALL FOR LOWER TAX RATES, LOWER OR MORE PUBLIC SAFETY. THAT'S. EVERYONE WANTS TO BE SAFE. NO ONE, DOESN'T WANT TO NOT BE SAFE. BUT. YEAH, THAT'S ALL I GOT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. BARRY WERNICK. [01:00:02] GOOD MORNING, MAYOR, HONORABLE COUNCIL. MY NAME IS BARRY WERNICK. I LIVE IN DISTRICT 11. 6544 DYKES WAY. DALLAS SHOULD BE NUMBER ONE. DALLAS HAS THE LARGEST, MOST COMPLEX LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY IN NORTH TEXAS. OUR OFFICERS HANDLE THE TOUGHEST CALLS, FROM HOMICIDES TO CHILD ABDUCTIONS TO VIOLENT GANG CRIME. EVERY OTHER CITY IN THE REGION RELIES ON DALLAS TO SET THE STANDARD. YET OUR OFFICERS ARE NOT BEST PAID. THEY ARE NOT IN THE TOP FIVE. THEY'RE NOT EVEN IN THE TOP TEN. THEY ARE IN 12TH PLACE. THINK ABOUT THAT. THE CITY WITH THE MOST CRIME TO FIGHT. THE CITY THAT SPENDS THE MOST TRAINING OFFICERS. THE CITY THAT SHOULD BE LEADING THE REGION IS RANKED 12TH IN PAY. SMALLER SUBURBS LIKE RICHARDSON AND ALLEN, WITH A FRACTION OF THE CRIME PAY MORE. IN FACT, EVEN IF WE WERE TO BRING OUR DOWN OUR PROPERTY TAX RATE TO THE NO-NEW-REVENUE RATE PROPOSED BY COUNCIL BY COUNCILWOMAN FOR DISTRICT 12, IT'S STILL ABOUT $0.25 MORE THAN FRISCO. YET FRISCO WITH HALF THE CRIME, IT PAYS ITS OFFICERS MORE. THAT'S BACKWARDS. IF ANYTHING, THIS COUNCIL SHOULD BE FIGHTING TO MAKE DALLAS NUMBER ONE IN POLICE PAY. NOT PRETENDING THAT 12TH 12TH PLACE IS GOOD ENOUGH. OFFICERS DESERVE MORE THAN LIP SERVICE. THEY DESERVE REAL PAYCHECKS THAT SHOW THEY ARE VALUED. DALLAS SHOULD LEAD. DALLAS SHOULD SET THE STANDARD. INSTEAD, YOU'RE ALLOWING US ALL TO FALL BEHIND. AND THAT'S UNACCEPTABLE. THIS IS YOUR MOMENT TO LEAD. NOT WITH WORDS, NOT WITH POLISHED TALKING POINTS, BUT WITH ACTION. DALLAS RESIDENTS ARE ASKING YOU. WE VOTED FOR YOU TO PUT SAFETY AHEAD OF VANITY PROJECTS AND WASTE. PLEASE DO THE RIGHT THING. MAKE THIS BUDGET A REFLECTION OF THAT PRIORITY. DALLAS SHOULD BE NUMBER ONE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. RITA BEVING. GOOD MORNING COUNCIL. MY NAME IS RITA BEVING AND I AM WITH THE GROUP PUBLIC CITIZEN. TODAY I'M SPEAKING AGAINST A CIRCULATED MEMO TO ZERO OUT THE CLIMATE ACTION PLANNING ALLOCATION FOR OEQS. NOT ONLY FOR THIS UPCOMING BUDGET YEAR, BUT FOR NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET, TOTALING MORE THAN $2.6 MILLION PER YEAR. THIS BUDGET ELIMINATION ESSENTIALLY GUTS THE OEQS CLIMATE ACTION PLANNING PROGRAM AND IS WHOLLY UNACCEPTABLE TO OUR ORGANIZATION AND THE MORE THAN 10,000 ENVIRONMENTAL MEMBERS AND SUPPORTERS IN THE CITY OF DALLAS THAT WE WORK WITH. THOUGH MANY DEPARTMENTS ARE INVOLVED IN DEVELOPING MEASURES APPLICABLE TO THE CECAP, IT IS OEQS THAT TAKES IN THE DATA REGARDING THE GREEN EFFORTS OF THOSE DEPARTMENTS, CONDUCTS THE EMISSIONS INVENTORY, AND ASSESSES THE PROGRESS TOWARD CECAP GOALS. THESE EFFORTS ARE IN ADDITION TO THEIR WORK ON CRITICAL AIR MONITORING AND THE HEAT ISLAND STUDY. I WOULD LIKE TO REMIND COUNCIL OF SOME HISTORY. IN MAY 2020, THIS COUNCIL UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE CECAP PLAN 15 TO 0. THAT VOTE INCLUDES PRESENT COUNCIL MEMBERS, INCLUDING DISTRICT 12, 05, 1, 9, 7 AND THE MAYOR, WHO STILL SITS ON THE MAYOR'S CLIMATE COUNCIL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND I WOULD LIKE TO SAY, IN REGARDING TO NUMBER 7 OF THESE 14 CUTS, IT WAS NOTED THAT THERE WAS NO IMMEDIATE, TANGIBLE RETURNS TO ELECTRIFYING THE CITY'S FLEET, OR FLEET. I BEG TO DIFFER. JACK IRELAND MENTIONED THAT $34.5 MILLION WAS ALLOCATED TO NEW SANITATION AND STORMWATER VEHICLES. I'VE TALKED TO MANUFACTURERS. ONE ELECTRIC TRASH TRUCK CAN RENDER UP TO 60% SAVINGS ON FUEL AND 30 TO 50% SAVINGS ON MAINTENANCE PER YEAR. THAT'S $40,000 ANNUALLY FOR JUST ONE [01:05:09] VEHICLE. COG NOW HAS A NEW FUND FOR $60 MILLION FOR ZERO EMISSION HEAVY DUTY VEHICLES. THAT REIMBURSES FOR UP TO 65% OF THOSE VEHICLES. THERE IS MONEY FOR CHARGERS THAT THE CITY CAN PRACTICALLY GET FOR FREE. AND THERE'S ALSO MONEY FOR SMALLER VEHICLES AS WELL. DALLA'S 10TH WORST IN THE NATION FOR AIR QUALITY OUT OF 228 CITIES. THAT'S YOUR TIME. LET'S NOT NEGATE OUR AIR PROGRAM. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NAUFIL DAUD. GOOD MORNING. SOME OF THE TOPICS I'M HERE TO TALK ABOUT ARE JUST FOR AWARENESS PURPOSES. I JUST WANT TO USE THIS PLATFORM. SO I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS LETTING ME SPEAK HERE. WHAT'S HAPPENING IN GAZA WILL PROBABLY BE A PERMANENT STAIN IN THE WORLD'S COLLECTIVE HISTORY. DOESN'T MATTER IF YOU ARE PRO ISRAEL, PALESTINE, MUSLIM, CHRISTIAN OR JEWISH. NO GOD ALLOWS THE JUSTIFICATION OF THE DEATH OF 17,000 CHILDREN WHOM A LOT ARE BEING SNIPED BY MILITARY SOLDIERS. THE IPC HAS CLASSIFIED THIS CRISIS AS A PHASE FIVE FAMINE CAUSED BY RESTRICTED HUMANITARIAN ACCESS AND CONFLICT, WHICH THREATENS THE LIVES OF OVER 130,000 CHILDREN THAT ARE UNDER FIVE BY MID 2026. OVER 100 HUMANITARIAN ORGANIZATIONS WHO ARE NOT PRO HAMAS BY THE WAY, HAVE WHICH INCLUDE CHRISTIAN AID, SAVE THE CHILDREN, DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS HAVE CONFIRMED THAT THEY HAVE PEOPLE ON THE GROUND THAT ARE BEING BLOCKED FROM ENTERING. HISTORY WILL NEVER FORGET HOW OUR GOVERNMENT WAS COMPLICIT IN ENABLING AND SUSTAINING THIS ONGOING HUMANITARIAN DISASTER, PARTICULARLY DUE TO THE REASON THAT MOST OF OUR REPRESENTATIVES, PROBABLY FROM CITY COUNCIL TO THE WHITE HOUSE, ARE FUNDED BY PRO-ISRAEL LOBBYISTS AND ARE BEING SILENCED BY MONEY. AND ANYONE WHO SPEAKS AGAINST US GETS SILENCED BY BEING CALLED ANTI-SEMITIC. WELL, IT'S NOT ANTI-SEMITIC TO SAY THAT WE MUST END THE FUNDING FOR NETANYAHU'S WAR MACHINE BASED ON HIS DEFINITION OF ANTI-SEMITISM. HE SHOULD PROBABLY STOP BOMBING HIMSELF BECAUSE THE PEOPLE OF GAZA ARE SEMITES, THEY ARE ARABS. SO NEXT INDIA IS BEING RUN BY A FASCIST LIAR WHO THROUGHOUT HISTORY HAS USED FALSE FLAGS FOR POLITICAL GAINS. THE US BANNED MODI FROM ENTERING THE COUNTRY IN 2005, CITING SEVERE VIOLATIONS OF RELIGIOUS FREEDOM. THE ONLY TIME A US VISA WAS DENIED TO A DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED LEADER FOR SUCH REASONS. PAKISTAN IS NOT A TERRORIST STATE. IN FACT, THERE WERE AMERICA'S BIGGEST NON-NATO ALLY DURING THE FIGHT OF TERRORISM AFTER 9/11. THESE, THEY WERE FIGHTING AMERICA'S WAR, BUT WAS PAID BY THE BLOOD OF PAKISTANI LIVES, OVER 80,000. AND LASTLY FORMER PRIME MINISTER IMRAN KHAN HAS BEEN ILLEGALLY DETAINED IN SOLITARY CONFINEMENT FOR THE LAST 750 DAYS. BASICALLY HE'S IN THE DARK. NO RAISES, NO LAWYERS, NO CARS, NO LIGHTS. WHICH ARE CLEAR VIOLATIONS OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS HUMAN NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSIONS. AND THEY SHOULD PROBABLY SEND AN AMBASSADOR TO CHECK ON HIS CONDITION. THANK YOU AGAIN FOR LETTING ME SEE. I APPRECIATE IT. THANKS. THANK YOU. AARON MCGREW. THANK YOU ALL FOR LETTING ME SPEAK. I'M HERE TODAY TO SPEAK FOR DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT. APRIL 1ST, 2008. I WAS WHAT YOU CALL A MENACE, A THUG, A HOODLUM. DALLAS SWAT CAME INTO MY TRAP HOUSE WHERE I WAS MANUFACTURING DRUGS. THEY WERE ABLE TO SHOW ME A NEW LIGHT. I DON'T KNOW ANY OFFICER IN BLACK THAT WOULD, OR WHOEVER. IT IS STRONG IN IN TEXAS, BUT IT'S EVEN STRONGER IN DALLAS. AND WHEN I WOULD SPEAK ABOUT IS BECAUSE IN OUR TRAP HOUSE, WE WOULD TALK ABOUT THE DALLAS POLICE BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT GETTING PAID. AND WE WOULD THINK THAT THEY WOULD NOT COME IN THERE BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT GETTING PAID. THEY'RE NOT GOING TO RISK THEIR LIFE FOR MAKING $80,000 WHEN I'M IN HERE, MAKING $80,000 IN ONE DAY. SO I'M ASKING YOU AS A COUNCIL TO KNOW THAT DALLAS COUNTY, I MEAN, DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT DESERVES 100 OR 150. THEY'RE RISKING THEIR LIFE. I POINTED A GUN AT SWAT. MY LIFE WAS ALMOST IN JEOPARDY AS WELL AS THEIRS. I WANT Y'ALL TO UNDERSTAND I'M SPEAKING FROM THIS. MY NAME IS ON RECORDS IN DALLAS. I KNOW, I KNOW THE, I KNOW DETECTIVE FORD FROM THE NARCOTICS AGENT. [01:10:10] AND NOW TODAY, I'M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT BECAUSE I TRULY BELIEVE THAT THEY ARE WHAT WE NEEDED IN DALLAS COUNTY AND AS WELL AS IN DALLAS, TEXAS. SO, COUNCIL, I'M ASKING Y'ALL TO REALLY THINK ABOUT IT BECAUSE I'M THE ONE THAT WAS THE MENACE. I WAS THE ONE THAT WAS OUT THERE DOING THE HATE CRIMES. I WAS THE ONE THAT WAS TERRORIZING DALLAS, TEXAS. I WAS THE ONE THAT DID NOT CARE ABOUT ANYONE BUT A DOLLAR. AND YOU HAVE MEN HERE WHO ARE MAKING $80,000 A YEAR RISKING THEIR LIFE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. DAVID D'ANGELO. GOOD MORNING MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBERS, THANK YOU FOR HAVING THIS MEETING, LETTING US SPEAK. MY NAME IS DAVID D'ANGELO, AND I'M HERE REPRESENTING RACETRAC, A CONVENIENCE STORE AND FUEL RETAILER WITH 13 LOCATIONS ACROSS DALLAS. EVERY DAY, OUR TEAM MEMBERS PROUDLY SERVE THOUSANDS OF DALLAS RESIDENTS AS GUESTS. WE ALSO EMPLOY NEARLY 200 DALLAS RESIDENTS IN OUR STORES. WE ARE PROUD TO BE PART OF THIS VIBRANT AND GROWING COMMUNITY, BUT I'M HERE TODAY BECAUSE WE ARE DEEPLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE SAFETY OF OUR GUESTS AND OUR EMPLOYEES. VIOLENCE AND THEFT REMAIN A PERSISTENT ISSUE IN AND AROUND THE COMMUNITIES OUR STORES SERVE. WE'VE WORKED HARD TO COMPLY WITH THE CITY'S STRONGER SECURITY STANDARDS, WHICH INCLUDE INSTALLING CAMERAS, UPGRADING LIGHTING, INCREASING SAFEGUARDS, HIRING PRIVATE SECURITY PERSONNEL WHEN IT'S APPROPRIATE, AND PARTNERING WITH DPD'S REAL TIME CRIME CENTER BY INTEGRATING MANY OF THOSE CAMERAS. WHILE THESE PROACTIVE STEPS ARE IMPORTANT TO PROVIDING A SAFER ENVIRONMENT FOR OUR GUESTS AND EMPLOYEES, NOTHING WE DO WILL REPLACE THE CRITICAL ROLE OF A WELL RESOURCED AND RESPONSIVE POLICE DEPARTMENT. I WANT TO BE CLEAR, THESE POLICE OFFICERS WE WORK WITH ARE DEDICATED AND PROFESSIONAL, AND OUR STORE EMPLOYEES HAVE AN EXCELLENT RELATIONSHIP WITH THEM. HOWEVER, THESE OFFICERS ARE CLEARLY OVERWORKED, UNDERPAID, AND STRETCHED THIN. TOO OFTEN WHEN CRIME OCCURS, THEY SIMPLY AREN'T THERE TO RESPOND QUICKLY BECAUSE THEY ARE ELSEWHERE. THAT LEAVES OUR TEAMS AND OUR GUESTS FEELING VULNERABLE AND UNPROTECTED. WE DO APPRECIATE THE COUNCIL'S LEADERSHIP AND COMMITMENT TO MAKING DALLAS A SAFE AND THRIVING CITY, AND RECOGNIZE RECOGNIZED THAT MANY CHALLENGES YOU FACE. BEYOND THIS ISSUE. RACETRACK DOES REMAIN COMMITTED TO BEING PART OF THE SOLUTION, AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO INVEST THE RESOURCES WE NEED TO ENSURE OUR GUESTS AND EMPLOYEES REMAIN SAFE. THAT IS WHY WE RESPECTFULLY URGE THAT YOU PRIORITIZE POLICE STAFFING, TRAINING, AND FAIR PAY. DALLAS DESERVES A POLICE DEPARTMENT THAT HAS THE PEOPLE AND RESOURCES TO RESPOND WHEN OUR COMMUNITY NEEDS THE MOST, AND WE THINK THEY DO A VERY VALUABLE JOB. THANK YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP, THE WORK YOU DO ON BEHALF OF RESIDENTS AND BUSINESSES, AND FOR HEARING OUR CONCERNS. WE WANT TO CONTINUE OUR HISTORY OF SERVING AS A STRONG PARTNER WITH THE CITY, AND WE BELIEVE THAT TOGETHER WE CAN MAKE DALLAS SAFER FOR EVERYONE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. DAVE. RYAN. LAMBERT. DAVE. RYAN. LAMBERT. IT'S NOT PRESENT. JOHN. SIMS. MS. GOOD MORNING, MAYOR COUNCIL. MY NAME IS JOHN SIMS. I LIVE AT 5135 BRYCE CANYON ROAD IN DALLAS, TEXAS. THE WELL, THOUGHT I WAS READY, AND I'M NOT, SO. APOLOGIES. PUBLIC SAFETY IS A BEDROCK OF OUR CITY. WITHOUT IT, EVERYTHING ELSE FALLS APART. BUSINESSES LEAVE. FAMILIES MOVE. NEIGHBORHOODS DECLINE. EVERY FACET OF DALLAS'S FUTURE HINGES ON PUBLIC SAFETY. THAT'S WHY DALLAS VOTERS PASSED PROPOSITION YOU ON NOVEMBER THE 5TH, 2024. THIS CHARTER AMENDMENT REQUIRES THAT AT LEAST 50% OF ANY ANNUAL REVENUE GROWTH, REVENUE EXCEEDING THE IN THE PREVIOUS YEAR MUST BE DEDICATED FIRST TO FUNDING THE DALLAS POLICE AND FIRE PENSION SYSTEM, THEN TO INCREASING STARTING OFFICER COMPENSATION AND BUILDING THE FORCE TO A MINIMUM OF 4000 OFFICERS. I WAS RAISED IN WEST DALLAS, AND I'VE EXPERIENCED THE CONSEQUENCES WHEN PUBLIC SAFETY ISN'T A PRIORITY YET. THE CURRENT BUDGET FAILS TO FULLY REFLECT PROPOSITION USED MANDATE. IF PUBLIC SAFETY WERE TRULY PRIORITY NUMBER ONE. DALLAS OFFICERS WOULDN'T BE EARNING LESS THAN THEIR SUBURBAN COUNTERPARTS IF PUBLIC SAFETY WERE PRIORITY NUMBER ONE. [01:15:06] MORE THAN HALF OF THE NEW REVENUE $111 MILLION IN THIS EXAMPLE WOULDN'T GO WOULD GO TO OFFICER PAY, NOT 58 MILLION THAT'S CURRENTLY ALLOCATED. IF PUBLIC SAFETY WERE PRIORITY NUMBER ONE, WE WOULD SEE A ROBUST, CREDIBLE, CREDITABLE PLAN TO REACH THE 4000 OFFICER THRESHOLD MANDATED BY THE CHARTER. INSTEAD, WE'RE CONTENDING WITH HIGH TURNOVER. NEARLY 40% OF OFFICERS LEAVE WITHIN FIVE YEARS, COSTING UP TO $275,000 IN TRAINING AND SEPARATION PER OFFICER. THE PEOPLE OF DALLAS ARE PERCEPTIVE. THEY SEE THE BUDGET DOESN'T ALIGN WITH THE LAW THAT THEY PASSED. NO AMOUNT OF POLISH MESSAGING ABOUT GOING ABOVE AND BEYOND WILL OBSCURE THAT. COUNCIL MEMBERS YOU WERE ELECTED TO LEAD. UPHOLD THE CHARTER AND REPRESENT THOSE WHO PUT YOU HERE. THE PEOPLE'S MESSAGE IS CLEAR PUBLIC SAFETY MUST COME FIRST. THE CHARTER REQUIRES IT. VOTERS DEMAND IT, AND YOUR OATH COMPELS IT. IT'S TIME TO BE ACCOUNTABLE. GIVE DALLAS THE BUDGET PRIORITIES. GIVE DALLAS A BUDGET THAT PRIORITIZES SAFETY AND HONORS THE WILL OF THE VOTERS. WELL. LET'S SEE. SORRY. DALLAS POLICE OVERTIME COSTS ABOUT $54 MILLION LAST YEAR. THAT WOULD COVER THE SALARY FOR 415 MORE OFFICERS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. REBECCA KORNBLUM. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS REBECCA KORNBLUM. AS PRESIDENT OF THE DALLAS BICYCLE COALITION, I REPRESENT HUNDREDS OF BIKE AND SAFE STREET ADVOCATES ACROSS DALLAS. I UNDERSTAND THAT WE ARE IN A DIFFICULT BUDGET SEASON, AND COUNCIL IS LOOKING TO MAKE CUTS WHERE POSSIBLE. DBRC IS ADVOCATING THAT WE DON'T CUT THE BIKE LANE FUND, WHICH IS IN THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS, OR THE VISION ZERO BUDGET, WHICH HAS BEEN SUGGESTED. DBRC IS ADVOCATING FOR SAFER STREETS. OUR OWN DIRECTOR OF TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC WORKS HAS SAID THAT IF WE MAINTAIN THE $2 MILLION IN THE BIKE LANE FUND, WILL BE ABLE TO COMPLETE OUR FIVE YEAR PLAN. THIS IS THE PLAN THAT WAS UNANIMOUSLY PASSED JUST A FEW MONTHS AGO BY THIS COUNCIL. WHILE THE BIKE PLAN ITSELF ASSUMES A 2.5 MILLION A YEAR BUDGET FROM OUR ANNUAL BUDGET DALLAS BICYCLE COALITION HAS ADVOCATED FOR A MODEST INCREASE TO CATCH US UP TO OTHER LEADING US CITIES. 2 MILLION IS OUR BASE. ANY CUTS TO THIS NUMBER SETS US BACK AND INVALIDATES THE MONEY, TIME AND EFFORT STAFF AND ADVOCATES PUT IN TO COMPLETE THIS PLAN. THERE IS SO MUCH POTENTIAL FOR BIKING IN DALLAS WHEN IT'S DONE WELL, IT'S EXTREMELY POPULAR. THE NORTH HAVEN TRAIL, THE KATY TRAIL THESE PLACES ARE SOME OF THE BEST PROJECTS IN DALLAS AND ARE WELL USED BY PEOPLE BIKING AND WALKING ALIKE. THEY PROVIDE SAFE ROUTES TO BIKE AND DALLAS AND ON STREET BIKEWAYS SERVE AS A CONNECTION TO THESE TRAILS. WITH CONTINUED INVESTMENT, BIKING COULD TRANSFORM DALLAS IN A MORE INTO A MORE VIBRANT, HEALTHY AND SAFE CITY. I ALSO WANT TO TALK ABOUT VISION ZERO, WHICH IS PRIMARILY A PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUE FOR EVERYONE, INCLUDING DRIVERS. BUT IT PROVIDES CRITICAL SAFETY INVESTMENTS FOR PEOPLE WALKING AND BIKING, WHICH ARE DISPROPORTIONATELY INJURED AND KILLED ON OUR ROADS. DALLAS ARE DANGEROUS. ROADS AND TRAFFIC VIOLENCE ARE A DRAIN ON OUR POLICE RESOURCES. WHILE WE APPLAUD THE FOCUS TO REDUCE VIOLENT CRIME IN OUR CITY, TRAFFIC DEATHS AND SEVERE INJURIES OUTPACE HOMICIDES 5 TO 1 1143 LIVES AND FAMILIES CHANGED FROM TRAFFIC VIOLENCE IN 2024 ALONE, COMPARED TO 233 HOMICIDES, AND THE TREND IS WIDENING THIS YEAR. NEITHER ARE ACCEPTABLE, BUT THE INVESTMENT SHOULD REFLECT THE IMPACT OF THE PROBLEM. TRAFFIC VIOLENCE IS SOLVABLE. CITY COUNCIL PASSED THE BIKE PLAN JUST THIS MAY, AND VISION ZERO IS ONLY A COUPLE OF YEARS INTO THE PROCESS. THESE INVESTMENTS WILL TAKE TIME TO MAKE AN IMPACT. NOW IS NOT THE TIME TO CUT THEM. THANK YOU, LINDA ABRAMSON. EVANS. GOOD MORNING, MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBERS AND ASSOCIATES, AND THANK YOU FOR ALL OF YOUR WORK. MY NAME IS LINDA ABRAMSON EVANS, A RESIDENT OF DALLAS SINCE 1979. [01:20:04] CURRENTLY AT 5822 CLENDENIN AVENUE. 75228, IN DISTRICT SEVEN. I'M A MEMBER OF THE TASK FORCE THAT COLLABORATES WITH THE OFFICE OF WELCOMING COMMUNITIES AND IMMIGRANT AFFAIRS, ALSO KNOWN AS WELCOMING DALLAS AND PROUD TO HAVE PARTICIPATED IN CREATING THE DALLAS WELCOMING STRATEGIC PLAN THAT THE COUNCIL APPROVED IN 2018. I'M SPEAKING TODAY IN THEIR SUPPORT AND IN OPPOSITION TO SUGGESTED BUDGET CUTS TARGETING SEVERAL BENEFICIAL DEPARTMENTS, INCLUDING THIS ONE. WELCOMING DALLAS IS A FEDERALLY COMPLIANT PROGRAM THAT SEEKS TO ADVANCE PUBLIC SAFETY, CIVIC ENGAGEMENT, AND ACCESSIBILITY FOR ALL RESIDENTS. THIS INCLUDES RESIDENTS WHO ARE IMMIGRANTS, WHICH MAKE UP ABOUT 24% OF DALLAS'S POPULATION. WELCOMING DALLAS STAFF COORDINATE THE VETERANS AFFAIRS COMMISSION THAT SUPPORTS THE 40,000 DALLAS RESIDENTS WHO ARE MILITARY VETERANS. ADDITIONALLY, WELCOME DALLAS STAFF HAVE BEEN SUPPORTING EFFORTS TO PREPARE FOR HOSTING THE FIFA WORLD CUP. BY ENGAGING RESIDENTS AND IDENTIFYING WAYS THAT THE CITY CAN UNIQUELY ADDRESS HUMAN RIGHTS, INCLUDING ANTI-HUMAN TRAFFICKING. LAST YEAR, THE CITY OF DALLAS AND OUR TEAM HOSTED THE WELCOMING INTERACTIVE CONFERENCE OF WELCOMING AMERICA, WHICH BROUGHT WORLDWIDE LEADERS HERE TO SHARE BEST PRACTICES AND PARTNERSHIPS IN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, CIVIC ENGAGEMENT, GOVERNMENT LEADERSHIP, AND INSPIRING STORIES ABOUT IMMIGRANT INCLUSION AND THEIR IMPORTANCE TO VITAL CITY LIFE. IN THE MEMO CIRCULATED LAST WEEK PROPOSING A VARIETY OF CUTS. I WAS DEEPLY CONCERNED TO SEE WHAT APPEARED TO ME TO BE AN INACCURATE DESCRIPTION OF WELCOMING DALLAS PURPOSE, IMPLYING THAT IT DUPLICATES REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT SERVICES THAT ARE HANDLED BY FEDERAL AND STATE AGENCIES. AS FOUNDER OF THE VOLUNTEER GUIDE TO REFUGEE SERVICE AGENCIES IN DALLAS FORT WORTH, I HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN RESETTLEMENT ADVOCACY SINCE 1998. BUT THAT IS NOT THE FUNCTION OF WELCOMING DALLAS. THE DEPARTMENT IS FOR THE BENEFIT OF EVERYONE WHO LIVES, WORKS, AND VISITS HERE. SO I DO WORRY THAT OTHER DEPARTMENTS SHOULD ALSO BE FURTHER RESEARCHED AND UNDERSTOOD BEFORE CUTTING COSTS, AND URGE YOU TO PLEASE VOTE AGAINST IT. AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU. AVIS HARTMAN. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS AVIS HARDIMAN AND I LIVE IN DISTRICT FOUR. I WAS BORN IN GREENVILLE, TEXAS, AND I WAS RAISED RIGHT HERE IN DALLAS SINCE AGE TWO. I'VE BEEN VOTING LONGER THAN SOME OF THE PEOPLE THAT ARE SITTING IN HERE TODAY. BUT LET ME TELL YOU SOMETHING. I HAVE NEVER SEEN ANYTHING LIKE THESE GAMES. EXCUSES AND DOUBLE TALK AND IT'S SHAMEFUL. THE PEOPLE OF THIS CITY ALL CAME TOGETHER AND PASSED PROP EIGHT PROPOSITION. YOU. EXCUSE ME. AND WE ARE READY TO SEE OUR NEIGHBORHOODS BUILD UP. AND WE'RE TIRED OF OUR LEADERS PRETENDING THAT THEY'RE DOING THEIR JOB. YOU BARELY ALLOCATED 50% OF THE NEW CITY REVENUE TO BE DEDICATED TO THE DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT. AND FIRE PENSION SYSTEM FOR DALLAS POLICE OFFICERS WAS THE MINIMUM STAFFING LEVEL AND AN INCREASE IN STARTING SALARIES FOR NEW POLICE OFFICERS TALKING ABOUT PAY. YOU SAID COMPETITIVE PAY. BUT OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT IS RANKED 12TH IN STARTING PAY. AREN'T WE LOSING OFFICERS EVERY SINGLE WEEK? SOME OF THEM WERE RAISED HERE. TRAINED HERE. THEY KNOW THE STREETS AND THE PEOPLE HERE, BUT THEY LEAVE HERE FOR BETTER PAY SOMEWHERE ELSE. WHO CAN BLAME THEM? WE THE PEOPLE. BLACK. WHITE. HISPANIC, ASIAN. INDIANS. YOUNG. OLD. TALL. FAT. WE WANT YOU TO FIX THIS. FIX IT. IT'S NOT OPTIONAL. IT'S A CHARTER AMENDMENT. IT'S THE LAW, NOT A SUGGESTION. AND IGNORING IT IS JUST BAD GOVERNING. SO REGARDLESS OF PARTY AFFILIATION, WE MUST FOLLOW THE LAW AND RESPECT. RESPECT THE WILL OF THE VOTERS. ARE YOU DO NOT DESERVE TO [01:25:10] SIT AND GOVERN ON THIS GREAT CITIES COUNCIL. STOP MAKING EXCUSES. STOP GASLIGHTING THE PEOPLE WHO PUT YOU HERE. FUND. PROP YOU ALL THE WAY AND GET THIS GREAT CITY BACK ON TRACK. THANK YOU. PEACE AND LOVE. THANK YOU. MIKE. HOOK. YOU PUBLIC SERVANTS, STOP BUCKING AGAINST WE DALLASITES. WE'RE TOLD OVER AND OVER THAT THERE'S NO MONEY. THAT'S NOT TRUE. DALLAS GOVERNMENT WALLOWS IN OUR MONEY AND SPENDS IT IN THE WRONG PLACES. PAY OUR COPS SUFFICIENTLY AND GET OUT OF OUR COPS WAY. MILLIONS OF OUR DOLLARS GO TO CONSULTANTS, VANITY PROJECTS, AND PET PROGRAMS THAT DO NOTHING TO KEEP OUR FAMILIES SAFE. MEANWHILE, THE MOST IMPORTANT LINE ITEM IN THE BUDGET PUBLIC SAFETY GETS EXCUSES. PROPOSITION U REQUIRES PROPER PAY FOR DALLAS OFFICERS WITHIN THE TOP FIVE FOR PAY. INSTEAD, OUR COPS ARE 12TH IN THE METROPLEX. THAT'S NOT A FUNDING ISSUE. THAT'S AN OBEDIENCE AND DERELICTION ISSUE. CITY GOVERNMENT SERVANTS STOP OBSTRUCTING WHAT WE DALLASITES CODIFIED IN 2024. YOU BUCKED AND SCOFFED AT OUR RULES, CALLING US STUPID. NUMBER SEVEN. ONE OF OUR OTHER TEXAS GOVERNMENTS, THE SUPREME COURT, HAD TO ASSIST. WE DALLASITES AGAINST YOUR DELIBERATE OBSTRUCTION. ALL DALLAS GOVERNMENTS STOP OBSTRUCTING WHAT WE DALLASITES WANT. AS WITH PEPPER SQUARE, STOP FOISTING YOUR DICTATOR DREAMS. WASTING OUR TIME AND OUR MONEY ON YOUR PETULANCE. FUND OUR 911 OPERATORS. DELETE THE WASTE AND PAY THE POLICE. DALLASITES VOTED FOR THIS. WE DEMANDED IT AND NUMBER SEVEN CALLED IT STUPID. WE DALLASITES HAVE BEEN LOUD AND CLEAR. WE WANT SAFER NEIGHBORHOODS, FASTER RESPONSE TIMES AND ENOUGH OFFICERS TO DO THEIR JOB MORE SAFELY ALIGN THIS BUDGET WITH THE PEOPLE'S LAWS AND PRIORITIES. WE ARE NOT CUSTOMERS. WE'RE NOT YOUR CUSTOMERS. WE ARE CITIZENS. YOU ARE OUR PUBLIC SERVANTS. NUMBERS TEN, SEVEN, NINE, 12, 14 AND FIVE HAVE SHOWN US DISRESPECT TODAY. BLATHERING. NUMBER SEVEN IS NOT EVEN HERE RIGHT NOW. OKAY, GET YOUR ACT STRAIGHT. THANK YOU. MAYOR AND COUNCIL, THIS CONCLUDES YOUR OPEN MICROPHONE SPEAKERS FOR THIS MEETING. MR. MAYOR. OKAY, LET'S MOVE ON TO OUR VOTING AGENDA, THEN. THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I WAS THE FIRST ONE ON THE LIST. Y'ALL DIDN'T CALL MY STAFF. WILL WILL ADDRESS YOUR ISSUES. WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO MOVE ON, MR. MAYOR OR. YEAH, WE CAN MOVE ON WHILE WE'RE WORKING THAT OUT. BUT I DIDN'T SEE ANYONE WE SKIPPED. YOU DO HAVE INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEM THREE, WHICH IS THE BUDGET. YEP. UNDERSTOOD. AND HOPEFULLY THAT'S BEING EXPLAINED RIGHT NOW. BUT YEAH, LET'S MOVE ON TO THE VOTING AGENDA. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. AGENDA ITEM ONE IS APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 20TH, [1. 25-2386A Approval of the Minutes of August 20, 2025 City Council Meeting] 2020 CITY COUNCIL MEETING. HEARD A MOTION FOR APPROVAL. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND? I HEARD A MOTION AND A SECOND. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE EYES HAVE IT. THE MINUTES ARE APPROVED. MADAM SECRETARY, NEXT ITEM, PLEASE. AGENDA ITEM TWO IS CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS. [2. 25-2422A Consideration of appointments to boards and commissions and the evaluation and duties of board and commission members (List of nominees is available in the City Secretary's Office)] THIS MORNING. YOU DO HAVE NOMINEES FOR INDIVIDUAL AND FULL COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS. I WOULD LIKE TO NOTE THAT THESE NOMINATIONS ARE FOR YOUR 20 2527 BOARD TERM, WHICH BEGINS OCTOBER 1ST, [01:30:02] 2025. NOMINEES TO YOUR ANIMAL ANIMAL ADVISORY COMMISSION NOEL DELGADO IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BLACKMON. MISS DELGADO MEETS THE GENERAL PUBLIC SPECIAL QUALIFICATION AND KAREN SANDERS IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY. MISS SANDERS ALSO MEETS THE GENERAL PUBLIC. SPECIAL QUALIFICATION. YOUR NOMINEES TO THE CITIZEN HOMELESSNESS COMMISSION, ANGELIA SABLAN, IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCILMEMBER RIDLEY. MISS CEYLON MEETS THE GENERAL PUBLIC. SPECIAL QUALIFICATION NATASHA S GERALD IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER GRACEY. MISS GERALD MEETS THE GENERAL PUBLIC. SPECIAL QUALIFICATION TO THE COMMISSION ON DISABILITIES. ASHLEY LINDSAY IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCILMEMBER RIDLEY. MISS LINDSAY MEETS THE COMMITTED TO THE COMMUNITY OF DISABLED PERSONS SPECIAL QUALIFICATION TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION, GOLDSTEIN DAVIS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCILMEMBER WEST AND ROSEANNE ARE MEALS IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY TO THE DALLAS HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION BOARD. ANTHONY R PAGE IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY TO THE ETHICS ADVISORY COMMISSION, AND CFA IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEST. MISS FAY MEETS THE GENERAL PUBLIC SPECIAL QUALIFICATION TO THE JUDICIAL NOMINATING COMMISSION. CARL H. GINSBURG IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION. JASON HARPER IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY. MR. HARPER MEETS THE HISTORIAN. SPECIAL QUALIFICATION TO THE MUNICIPAL LIBRARY BOARD. AMY SHAFNER IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEST TO THE PERMIT AND LICENSE APPEAL BOARD. CARMEN AYALA IS BEING NOMINATED BY MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO TO THE YOUTH COMMISSION. NAOMI M IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEST AND ALSO TO THE YOUTH COMMISSION. MAISIE ALTON IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY. YOUR NOMINEES FOR FULL COUNCIL APPOINTMENT TO THE NORTH OAK CLIFF MUNICIPAL MANAGEMENT DISTRICT. LINDA F WISE IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEST TO THE REINVESTMENT ZONE EIGHT BOARD DESIGN DISTRICT. ERIC MOORE IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CADENA. NICK SEAMAN IS BEING NOMINATED TO BOTH YOUR REINVESTMENT ZONE 11 BOARD DOWNTOWN AND REINVESTMENT ZONE FIVE BOARD CITY CENTER BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY TO THE REINVESTMENT ZONE SEVEN BOARD SPORTS ARENA. JOHN M GALLEGOS IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CADENA AND TO THE REINVESTMENT ZONE 16 BOARD, DAVIS GARDEN. NICOLAS CARMONA IS BEING NOMINATED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEST. THESE ARE YOUR NOMINEES. MR. MAYOR. IS THERE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL? I HEARD A MOTION AND A SECOND. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT. CONGRATULATIONS TO ALL THE NOMINEES. THE NEXT ITEM, PLEASE. MR. MAYOR, YOUR BRIEFING AGENDA CONTINUES. [A. 25-2556A FY 2025-26 & FY 2026-27 Budget Discussion and Amendments *For budget purposes, the City Council will be sitting as a Committee of the Whole. - Required Posting per H.B. 1522: The proposed budget is posted online at FY 2025-26 Proposed Budget and accessible directly from the city’s main page - www.dallascityhall.com - Required Posting per H.B. 1522: The Taxpayer Impact Statement for the median-valued homestead in the City of Dallas is posted online at Taxpayer Impact Statement (Median Value) (Part 1 of 2)] OKAY, WELL, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO OUR CITY MANAGER FOR OUR BRIEFINGS FOR TODAY. THANK YOU. MEMBERS. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR, AND GOOD MORNING. WE WOULD LIKE TO JUMP INTO BRIEFING NUMBER A, THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONTINUED SUPPORT AND ENGAGEMENT REGARDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2026 AND FISCAL YEAR 2027 BIENNIAL BUDGET. THIS MORNING BRIEFING A IS A TIME SET ASIDE FOR YOU TO CONSIDER BUDGET AMENDMENTS PROPOSED BY MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL BETWEEN FRIDAY OF LAST WEEK AT 10 A.M. TO LAST NIGHT AT 7:30 P.M., WE RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 15 AMENDMENTS, TWO OF WHICH WERE WITHDRAWN. MR. ISLAND DISTRIBUTED AN UPDATED LIST OF THOSE AMENDMENTS TO EVERYONE LAST NIGHT. THEREFORE, AT THIS TIME, THERE ARE 13 AMENDMENTS FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION AND DISCUSSION TODAY. AFTER THE DISCUSSION, MR. MAYOR, A STRAW POLL PROCESS FOR THE BUDGET AMENDMENTS, WE WILL BE ASKING FOR YOU TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER THREE, WHICH IS APPROVAL OF THE BUDGET ON FIRST READING. OUR PROCESS REQUIRES APPROVAL OF THE BUDGET IN TWO STEPS. SO AFTER APPROVAL. TODAY, CITY COUNCIL WILL CONSIDER THE BUDGET ON SECOND READING, ALONG WITH THE TAX RATE ORDINANCE AND OTHER BUDGET RELATED AGENDA ITEMS IN TWO WEEKS, WHICH WILL BE ON WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER THE 17TH. AT THIS TIME, MR. MAYOR, I'LL TURN THE PROCESS OVER TO YOU TO GO THROUGH THE REVIEW OF THE BUDGET AMENDMENTS AND THE STRAW POLL PROCESS. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU, MADAM CITY MANAGER. SO IS THERE A MOTION AT THIS TIME TO GO INTO A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE. YES, MAYOR. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THAT MOTION. MAYOR PRO TEM, I MOVE THAT THE CITY COUNCIL GO INTO THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE TO CONSIDER PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE FY 2025, 2026 BUDGET. IS THERE ANY OBJECTION? HEARING NONE SO ORDERED. WE'RE NOW IN A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE. AND I'LL REMIND EVERYONE WHAT THAT MEANS. WE'RE NOW ACTING AS A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE VOTES ON AMENDMENTS TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2025 BUDGET. AND THESE ARE NOT FINAL ACTIONS THAT WERE TAKEN TODAY, BUT MERELY RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WILL BE FINALLY VOTED ON AT A LATER DATE. MOTIONS THAT ARE PERMISSIBLE TODAY AND A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ARE AMENDMENTS, INCLUDING REMOVING OR STRIKING SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS. [01:35:07] POINTS OF ORDER, AS ALWAYS. APPEALS AS ALWAYS, AND INQUIRIES AS ALWAYS. ROLL CALL VOTES AND BALLOT VOTES ARE NOT GOING TO HAPPEN TODAY. WE'RE GOING TO USE THE CITY SEALS THAT ARE BEING DISTRIBUTED, OR SHOULD BE DISTRIBUTED SOON TO SIGNIFY YOUR SUPPORT OF AN AMENDMENT. AND ALTHOUGH A FORMAL VOTE WON'T BE TAKEN, THE CITY SECRETARY WILL BE RECORDING THE NAMES OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS SHOWING THEIR CITY SEALS IN FAVOR OF ANY PARTICULAR MOTION. AND AS ALWAYS, WE WILL FOLLOW THE 531 DEBATE FORMAT JUST TO MAKE SURE WE'RE OPERATING FROM THE SAME HYMNAL HERE. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE IS HAS GOT THE DOCUMENT LOOKS LIKE THIS. AT THE ON THE BOTTOM LEFT HAND CORNER IT SAYS AMENDMENTS IMMENSE 8.29.25, I BELIEVE, IS WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, AND IT'S THREE PAGES LONG. IT HAS A TOTAL OF 15 AMENDMENTS ON IT, TWO OF WHICH HAVE BEEN STRUCK A NUMBER SEVEN AND NUMBER EIGHT. CORRECT ME IF YOU HEAR ANYTHING I'M SAYING. THAT'S INCORRECT, MADAM SECRETARY. MADAM CITY MANAGER OR YOUR STAFF. BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE ABLE TO REFER TO THE AMENDMENTS BY NUMBER. AND EVERYONE'S TALKING USING THE SAME LANGUAGE. SO IF I SAY ANYTHING INCORRECT, LET ME KNOW. BUT I THINK THAT IS THIS IS THE DOCUMENT. AND AGAIN, ONLY SEVEN AND EIGHT HAVE BEEN STRICKEN, BUT WE WILL STILL KEEP THE SAME NUMBERING FOR PURPOSES OF, OF REFERENCE. I, AS I HAVE DONE IN THE PAST, WILL JUST GO IN THE ORDER THAT THEY ARE LISTED AND WE'LL DISPOSE OF THEM IN ORDER. SO MADAM CITY MANAGER, DOES THAT WORK? YOUR STAFF'S. YES, SIR. ARE YOU ALL READY? AND AGAIN, IT'S UP TO. IT'S UP TO SOMEONE TO MOVE EACH ONE OF THESE FORWARD TO, TO DISCUSS. THEY AREN'T JUST GOING TO SORT OF COME UP AUTOMATICALLY. SO I'M LOOKING FOR PEOPLE TO, TO CHIME IN, TO INTRODUCE THEIR AMENDMENTS, AND THEN WE'LL HAVE A DISCUSSION AND THEN THE STRAW VOTE ON EACH ONE. SO. I'M WAITING. ARE YOU READY. WE'RE JUST GOING TO GO IN ORDER. SO AGAIN YOU HAVE TO BRING UP YOUR OWN. FOR WHAT PURPOSE? CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN YOU HAD NOT INDICATED IF WE WERE GOING TO GO IN NUMERIC ORDER. YOU SAID YOU WERE WAITING FOR SOMEBODY TO MAKE A MOTION FOR ONE OF THEIR ITEMS. AND SO I WOULD LIKE TO GO IN NUMERICAL ORDER, BUT IF SOMEONE DOESN'T INTRODUCE THEIR AMENDMENT, WE'LL JUST GO TO THE NEXT ONE UNTIL SOMEONE DOES. WE'RE NOT WE'RE NOT FORCING AMENDMENTS UP TODAY. WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THEM IN ORDER. IF PEOPLE WOULD LIKE TO INTRODUCE THEIR AMENDMENTS, THEY CAN. MAYOR. YES. THANK YOU. I MOVED TO SUBMIT THE AMENDMENT WITH SOURCE OF FUNDS OF $282,889 FROM THE TAX RATE AND THE USE OF FUNDS FOR AN INCREASE OF OFFICE OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT BY $282,889 FOR HOMELESS DIVERSION PROGRAM. OKAY, THAT IS A IS THAT REFLECTED ACCURATELY ON THE PAGE AS AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE? YES, SIR. OKAY. DO DO I THINK DO WE NEED SECONDS TO HAVE THEM BROUGHT FORWARD? WE'VE TRADITIONALLY WE'VE NEEDED AN AMENDMENT TO HAVE A SECOND TO EVEN BE DISCUSSED. IS THAT CORRECT? OKAY. THAT'S BEEN CONFIRMED. SO IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND? IT'S BEEN SECONDED, DID. MR. BAZALDUA. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES TO EXPLAIN YOUR AMENDMENT. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I DO WANT TO APPLAUD OUR CITY MANAGER FOR THE WORK AND PRIORITIZATION OF OUR UNSHELTERED RESIDENTS. IT'S ONE THAT THING THAT WE HAVE HEARD MORE AND MORE FROM OUR CONSTITUENTS ON BEING A PRIORITY TO INVEST IN AND INVEST HUMANELY. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IF MISS CROSSLEY COULD COME UP AND SPEAK TO THE SUCCESS OF OUR CURRENT DIVERSION PROGRAM WITH OUR CONTRACTED PARTNER AND HOW THIS ENHANCEMENT WOULD SUPPORT OUR EFFORTS FOR REUNIFICATION AND DIVERSION EFFORTS WITH OUR UNSHELTERED. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING. CHRISTINE CROSSLEY, OFFICE OF HOMELESS SOLUTIONS DIRECTOR. WE HAVE HAD GREAT SUCCESS AS A CONTINUUM OF CARE SYSTEM WITH DIVERSION. IT IS THE MOST INEXPENSIVE AND MOST EFFECTIVE WAY TO QUICKLY DIVERT PEOPLE OUT OF HOMELESSNESS. IT'S OVER 60% OF THE 60% OF THE METHOD THAT'S RESPONSIBLE FOR MOVING PEOPLE OUT OF HOMELESSNESS OVER THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS. I WILL SAY THAT WE WERE VERY PLEASED TO GET THE CITY MANAGER'S BUDGET DOUBLING OUR CURRENT FUNDING. [01:40:06] SO RIGHT NOW WE'RE AT ABOUT COMING INTO THE NEW YEAR, 255,000 ACROSS THREE CONTRACTS. WE'VE BEEN AT A LITTLE BIT MORE BUT WE HAD SOME PERFORMANCE ISSUES THAT HAVE NOW BEEN RECTIFIED. AND SO GOING FORWARD AND DOUBLING THAT AMOUNT IS FANTASTIC. I WILL SAY THAT THIS IS, AGAIN, A VERY CHEAP AND INEXPENSIVE INTERACTION WITH VERY DRAMATIC RESULTS, BECAUSE IT TAKES SO LITTLE MONEY. YOU NEED TO BE CAREFUL WHEN YOU'RE. YOU NEED TO BE CAREFUL IN FRONT LOADING IT THAT YOU'RE NOT OVEREXTENDING CAPACITY BECAUSE IT'S IT'S KIND OF DIFFICULT TO EXPEND IF YOU DO A LOT AT THE SAME TIME. AND SO I THINK WE'RE REALLY GOOD WITH WHERE WE ARE FOR THE FIRST YEAR, BUT MAYBE MOVING FORWARD WE COULD LOOK AT SCALING IT UP AS PEOPLE GET USED TO THE NEW NORMAL TOTAL. AND WHEN YOU SPEAK ABOUT THE MOST ONE OF THE MOST INEXPENSIVE WAYS TO, TO SEE GREAT RESULTS. I CAN'T REMEMBER THE WAY YOU WORDED IT, BUT CAN YOU QUANTIFY WHAT THE $150,000 INVESTMENT RETURNS, QUITE FRANKLY. AND THEN IF YOU COULD USE THAT COMPARISON TO WHAT, IN A TRADITIONAL HOUSING EFFORT VERSUS THAT OF THE DIVERSION PROGRAM WHAT IT WOULD NORMALLY COST US PER INDIVIDUAL TO BE HOUSED IN A MORE TRADITIONAL SENSE. SURE. I DON'T HAVE THE SPECIFIC PROGRAM METRICS OF WHAT IT BREAKS DOWN TO PER PERSON IN FRONT OF ME, BUT I CAN TELL YOU. SO RIGHT NOW, WE'RE AT 255,000 ACROSS THREE PROGRAMS. THE PROPOSED TOTAL IN THE CITY MANAGER'S PROPOSED BUDGET WOULD BRING US TO AROUND 555,000. BUT WITHIN THAT, YOU'RE LOOKING AT DIVERSIONS THAT ARE A PLANE OR TRAIN TICKET, BECAUSE A CASE MANAGER HAS CONFIRMED THAT THERE'S FAMILY ON THE OTHER SIDE, THAT WE'RE BRINGING YOU BACK TO MAYBE SOME MONEY TO GET YOU BACK INTO A LANDLORD'S INTO A SITUATION BECAUSE YOU'VE LEFT AND IT'S JUST ABOUT WORKING WITH THE LANDLORD. YOU KNOW, EVICTIONS ARE EXPENSIVE FOR EVERYONE. IF THEY CAN WORK IT OUT BETWEEN THEMSELVES AND GET YOU BACK IN THE HOUSING, THAT'S GREAT. OR IT'S AN INTERMEDIARY WITH CLOSE BY FAMILY. EITHER WAY, THAT IS SIGNIFICANTLY LESS EXPENSIVE THAN PAYING SOMEONE'S RENT FOR A YEAR OR TWO. AND AS WE KNOW, YOU KNOW, IF YOU SCALE DOWN, YOU START AT THE TOP, WHICH IS DOING NOTHING WHICH IN 2024, THE COUNTY WAS SAYING WAS ABOUT 43,000 PER PERSON ANNUALLY. TO DO NOTHING HOUSING THEM THROUGH RAPID REHOUSING IS ABOUT 26,000 PER YEAR. AND DIVERSION. I MEAN, COMPARE THAT TO THE COST OF A BUS TICKET OR A PLANE TICKET. SO, YOU KNOW, INFINITESIMALLY LESS. AND I UNDERSTAND, JUST AS YOU MENTIONED, THE THE INCREASE IN THIS SHOULD BE SHOULD NOT BE SUBSTANTIAL. WE SHOULDN'T THROW MILLIONS OF DOLLARS INTO THIS PROGRAM. NOT NOT RIGHT AT FIRST. SO DO WE HAVE THE CAPACITY TO FIRST, DO WE HAVE THE DEMAND? AND SECOND, DO WE HAVE THE CAPACITY FOR THE PROPOSED INCREASE IN THIS PROGRAM? SO WE HAVE THE CAPACITY AND I BELIEVE WE ALSO HAVE WELL, WE DEFINITELY HAVE THE NEED, AND WE HAVE THE CAPACITY TO DO WHAT'S BEEN PROPOSED IN THE CITY MANAGER'S BUDGET, WHICH IS DOUBLE IT. AND THEN I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A YEAR OF HOW PROGRAMS REACT TO THAT BEFORE I MAKE A FURTHER CALL ON WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. SO THIS IS IS JUST MEANT TO DO EXACTLY WHAT WE HAVE DONE. WE'VE SEEN GREAT RESULTS. WE'VE SEEN THOUSANDS OF UNSHELTERED RESIDENTS BE HOUSED. BUT WE HAVE TO CONTINUE TO INVEST TO SEE THESE RESULTS. AND THIS IS WHAT I WOULD CALL IN THE TOOL CHEST THAT WE HAVE ONE OF THE LOWER HANGING FRUITS ON OUR ABILITY TO MAKE TANGIBLE RESULTS. SO I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THIS IS A HUGE AMOUNT OF MONEY WITH WHAT IT IS THAT WE COULD ACCOMPLISH. AND IF WE ARE ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH HOUSING FOLKS BEFORE THEY GET TO CHRONIC, AND IT DOES COST MORE PER PERSON IT WILL JUST BE A LARGER INVESTMENT ON OUR PART TO HELP MITIGATE. SO I HOPE THAT I CAN HAVE YOUR SUPPORT. THANK YOU. MAYOR. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. WE'RE ON AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE IN THE CITY COUNCIL PROPOSED BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR 20 2526. THANK YOU. AND THANK YOU FOR APPOINTING ME TO BE CHAIR OF THE HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS COMMITTEE. I BELIEVE I'VE SERVED SIX YEARS AS THE VICE CHAIR, AND I HAVE A PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND IN SERVICES TO HOMELESS PEOPLE. OUR CITY MANAGER HAS PROVIDED SUFFICIENT TAXPAYER FUNDS FOR THIS SERVICE, AND PROPOSED A TAX RATE TO TRY TO TRY TO KEEP OUR CITY AFFORDABLE FOR OUR HOMEOWNERS, FOR OUR RENTERS, AND FOR OUR BUSINESSES AND COMPETITIVE WITH SURROUNDING CITIES. [01:45:01] I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING ANY INCREASE IN THE TAX RATE, EVEN HIGHER THAN WHAT OUR CITY MANAGER HAS ALREADY PROPOSED. THIS IS YOUR WEEKLY REMINDER THAT WE HAVE A TAX RATE THAT IS ALREADY HIGHER THAN ANY OF THE FIVE LARGEST TEXAS CITIES, AND HIGHER THAN OUR METROPLEX CITIES. I WILL NOT SUPPORT THIS ITEM OR ANY ITEM THAT CONTINUES TO RAISE OUR TAX RATE. IT IS ALREADY TOO HIGH. THANK YOU. JIM RIDLEY RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE IN OUR PACKET. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I TOO WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS AMENDMENT FOR THE REASONS STATED BY MISS CROSSLEY, WHO IS THE PERSON WHO ADMINISTERS OUR HOMELESS PROGRAMS. IN SAYING THAT THE CITY MANAGER HAS ALREADY DOUBLED HER DIVERSION BUDGET, AND SHE IS CONCERNED ABOUT THE STAFF'S ABILITY TO CONSTRUCTIVELY UTILIZE THE ADDITIONAL PROPOSED 282,000 UNTIL SHE HAS HAD AT LEAST A YEAR TO ASSESS WHAT THE CITY MANAGER'S INCREASE CAN ACCOMPLISH. THEREFORE, THIS IS A ITEM THAT IS AT BEST PREMATURE UNTIL THE STAFF ASSURES US THAT THEY CAN CONSTRUCTIVELY UTILIZE THIS MONEY. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE BEFORE WE STRAW VOTE. SEEING NONE, PLEASE INDICATE YOUR SUPPORT FOR THE AMENDMENT BY SHOWING YOUR CITY. SEALS RAISED IN FAVOR COUNCIL MEMBER, BAZALDUA, BLACKMON AND RESENDEZ. WITH ONLY THREE SEALS RAISED IN FAVOR, THE AMENDMENT FAILS, MR. MAYOR. OKAY, I'M LOOKING FOR MORE MOTIONS ON AMENDMENTS. I MOVE TO PUT AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO FORWARD. DO YOU WANT ME? IS THAT OKAY TO. YES. SINCE EVERYONE HAS THE LITERATURE IN FRONT OF THEM, IT WOULD BE PERFECTLY ACCEPTABLE. BUT FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE PUBLIC, WOULD YOU READ THE SOURCE AND USE OF FUNDS AS PART OF YOUR MOTION, AND WE'LL GET A SECOND FOR IT IF THERE IS ONE, AND DISCUSS IT THEN. POINT OF CLARIFICATION. YES, SIR. MAY I HIGH LEVEL PUT SOURCE OF FUNDS IN DOLLAR AMOUNT, OR ARE YOU WANTING ME TO READ ITEMIZED? JUST FOR THE PURPOSES OF MAKING SURE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE SAME AMENDMENT, AND THAT YOU WANT TO DO WHAT'S WRITTEN ON THE PAGE IF YOU'LL JUST SAY WHAT YOU WANT, THE SOURCE OF FUNDS TO BE IN THE USE OF FUNDS AS PART OF YOUR MOTION. AND THEN IF THERE'S A SECOND, WE'LL LET YOU EXPLAIN IT MORE. YES, SIR. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I MOVE TO SUBMIT AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO, SOURCE OF FUNDS FROM THE TAX RATE OF $2.75 MILLION AND THE USE OF FUNDS TO GO TO TRANSPORTATION PUBLIC WORKS BY $2.75 MILLION. THERE ARE SPECIFIC ITEMIZED PROJECTS IN THE USE OF FUNDS. ONE FOR WARRANTED TRAFFIC SIGNALS ON HIGH INJURY NETWORK THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED. CAMP WISDOM AND RACING CAMP WISDOM AND INDEPENDENCE, SAINT AUGUSTINE AND SILVER FALLS. ALSO $500,000 FOR SUPPLEMENTAL REPAIR WORK FOR BRIDGES WILDWOOD OVER TRINITY RIVER AND MOCKINGBIRD LANE, AND OVER FISHER ROAD. AND ALSO $750,000 FOR OUR NEED TO STRIPE CROSSWALKS. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND? IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. MISTER BAZALDUA, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES TO EXPLAIN YOUR AMENDMENT? THANK YOU. MAYOR, I SOMETHING WE ALSO HEAR A LOT FROM OUR RESIDENTS IS TO CONTINUE TO INVEST MORE INTO OUR INFRASTRUCTURE. AND THERE HAVE BEEN SPECIFIC NEEDS THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED THAT UNFORTUNATELY, DID NOT MAKE THE CUT IN THIS PARTICULAR BUDGET THAT I THINK WE HAVE DATA TO SUPPORT. THAT THIS, THESE THESE ARE PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUES. AND SPECIFICALLY INFRASTRUCTURE THAT HAS BEEN IGNORED, QUITE FRANKLY, IN PARTS OF OUR CITY IN THE PAST. AND SO WOULD LOVE TO SEE US NOT SAVE. AS A RESIDENT SAID IN OUR LAST BUDGET TOWN HALL OVER A YEAR PERIOD. SAVE A WHATABURGER VALUE MEAL IN ORDER TO KEEP A NOMINAL AMOUNT OF MONEY ON THE TABLE AND NOT BE USED FOR THE PRIORITIES THAT THEY HAVE MADE VERY CLEAR THEY WISH WE WOULD BE SPENDING MORE DOLLARS IN. SO WE KNOW THERE'S A GREAT DEAL FOR TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC WORKS. WE ALSO KNOW THAT WE'VE HAD A PLAN IN PLACE FOR ZERO DEGRADATION THAT OUR BOND PACKAGE GAVE US TO A GOOD PLACE. AND OUR CITY MANAGER HAS INCREASED THE LANE MILES. [01:50:02] HOWEVER, THERE ARE SOME PIECES WHEN WE ARE PUTTING ALL OF OUR EGGS IN THE BASKET TO REALLY ADDRESS THE LANE MILE CONSTRUCTION ON ACTUALLY FURNISHING WARRANTED TRAFFIC SIGNALS THAT ARE OUT OF DATE BY 60 PLUS YEARS. ADDRESSING UNSAFE ROADWAYS IN ON BRIDGE WAYS. AND THEN ALSO, AS I'VE MENTIONED BEFORE, I MENTIONED IT LAST WEEK WE ARE IN DIRE NEED OF AN INFLUX OF INVESTMENT FOR STRIPING AND CROSSWALKS. SPECIFICALLY, PEDESTRIAN SAFETY IS SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD ALL BE PRIORITIZING AS WE APPROACH OUR FIFA GAMES. SPECIFICALLY, WE ARE GOING TO HAVE PEOPLE FROM ALL OVER THE WORLD THAT WILL BE WALKING OUR STREETS. AND I KNOW THAT IN SPEAKING WITH MISTER CALI OR DOCTOR CALI THAT HE HAS EXPRESSED ALSO THE NEED FOR US TO PRIORITIZE BRINGING IN MORE STRIPING IN OUR CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT, SPECIFICALLY AROUND OUR CONVENTION CENTER AND IDEALLY AROUND THE FAN FEST AT FAIR PARK AS WELL. DOCTOR CALI, CAN YOU SPEAK TO THE USE OF THESE FUNDS FOR WHAT WAS IDENTIFIED AS A PRIORITY. PLEASE. GOOD MORNING. SIR. DUSTIN CORLEY, DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. LET ME START BY SAYING THAT I THANK THE CITY MANAGER HAD PUT FORWARD A A GREAT BUDGET, ESPECIALLY FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC WORKS. SO I THINK WE'VE GOT A LOT OF THINGS COVERED IN THE NEW BUDGET, ESPECIALLY AS YOU ALLUDED TO, THAT WE'RE INCREASING THE LANE MILES FROM 710 TO 750 AND AND SO ON. SO AS FAR AS THE PAVEMENT MARKINGS IS CONCERNED, ALSO THE EXISTING THE CURRENT BUDGET AS PUT FORWARD BY THE CITY MANAGER, INCLUDES $300,000 IN PAVEMENT MARKING MARKINGS SPECIFIC FOR THE DOWNTOWN AREA. AT THE END OF THE DAY, I MEAN, CERTAINLY WE, MY DEPARTMENT AND MY STAFF WILL DELIVER BASED ON WHAT THIS COUNCIL DECIDES AS FAR AS FUNDING IS CONCERNED. AND THAT IS OUR COMMITMENT TO WHATEVER WE END UP BEING DOING. SO ON THIS AMENDMENT AGAIN, I MY WHILE THESE LOCATIONS ARE PRETTY GOOD AND CAN BE POSITIVE. HOWEVER, LIKE I SAID WE'LL WE'LL DELIVER ON WHATEVER THIS COUNCIL DECIDES. DO WE HAVE THE CAPACITY TO TO DELIVER ON THIS? I KNOW THAT OVER 75% OF RESPONDENTS IN OUR LAST CITYWIDE SURVEY SAID TO PRIORITIZE DOLLARS SPECIFICALLY ON REPAIRING ROADWAYS. SO ADDING THIS ADDITIONAL DOLLARS FOR ROADWAYS THAT ARE MOST PRESSING THAT ARE NOT CURRENTLY INCLUDED. DO WE HAVE THE CAPACITY? WELL, THE THE PREFERENCE, WHILE WE HAVE INDICATED, I MEAN, THERE IS A SPECIFICITY HERE ON THIS ONE HERE ON THE LOCATIONS. THE PREFERENCE WOULD BE FOR FLEXIBILITY IF THE COUNCIL WISHES TO GO IN THAT DIRECTION SO THAT WE CAN DEPLOY THE RESOURCES AS THEY ARE NEEDED BASED ON THE CAPACITIES. OKAY. IF I COULD, MR. MAYOR. IF I COULD JUMP IN ON THAT. AND THANK YOU SO MUCH, MR. CALI, FOR YOUR RESPONSE. COUNCIL MEMBER. BAZALDUA. WE DEFINITELY CONTINUE TO LOOK AT OUR ABILITY TO DELIVER, AS WE'VE TALKED IN THE PAST, ABOUT WAYS THAT WE WANT TO ELEVATE HOW WE'RE ABLE TO MOVE PROJECTS FORWARD, WHETHER WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE BOND PROGRAM, WHICH WE'RE LOOKING AT A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT MODIFICATIONS TO OUR CURRENT DELIVERY MODEL AROUND THE BOND PROGRAM, WE DEFINITELY, IF THE COUNCIL APPROVES US TO MOVE IN THIS DIRECTION. WITH ADDITIONAL FUNDING, WE WOULD WORK TO ENSURE THAT FROM A CAPACITY STANDPOINT, THAT WE'RE ABLE TO DELIVER WHAT IS INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET. DOING IT IN AN AREA THAT WE KNOW ACROSS THE CITY THAT THERE ARE NEEDS, AS YOU'VE IDENTIFIED, BUT WE DEFINITELY WILL HAVE TO WORK TO SCALE UP ON THE STAFFING SIDE, WHICH IS WHAT MR. KHALIL HAS BEEN WORKING ON EVEN THIS YEAR. OUR GOAL IS TO BE ABLE TO DELIVER A LOT OF OUR STREET PROJECTS A LOT FASTER THAN WHAT WE HAVE BEEN PREVIOUSLY, SO WE WOULD TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION IF ADDITIONAL FUNDING IS PROVIDED FOR THESE PROJECTS. BUT THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE QUESTION. THANK YOU, MADAM CITY MANAGER. THANK YOU, DOCTOR, AND THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO IN OUR PACKET. THANK YOU. I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THIS AMENDMENT FOR THE SAME REASON THAT THE SOURCE OF FUNDS IS A TAX INCREASE OVER WHAT THE CITY MANAGER HAS RECOMMENDED. [01:55:07] SECONDLY, I'LL SAY THIS, THAT WE JUST HEARD FROM OUR DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS AND TRANSPORTATION THAT HE WOULD LIKE FLEXIBILITY IN ANY ADDITIONAL DOLLARS. SO I WOULD DEFER TO MY COLLEAGUES AMENDMENTS THAT ARE COMING NUMBER TEN, 11, 13 AND 14, WHICH DON'T REQUIRE A TAX INCREASE AND DO PROVIDE THAT FLEXIBILITY. SO PERHAPS YOUR ATTENTION CAN BE DIRECTED TOWARDS THOSE. THANK YOU, MR. RIDLEY. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO IN OUR PACKET. DOCTOR KELLY, COULD YOU COME BACK TO THE PODIUM? DOCTOR CURLEY, CAN YOU TELL US HOW MUCH IS ALLOCATED IN THE CITY MANAGER'S BUDGET CITYWIDE FOR CROSSWALK PAINTING? CURRENTLY, AS FAR AS THE PAVEMENT MARKINGS IS CONCERNED, WE'RE ABOUT 3.5 MILLION IN THE CURRENT BUDGET. SO THE 300,000 FIGURE YOU MENTIONED IS JUST FOR THE CBD. IT. THAT WAS THE THE STATED INTENT IN THE AS PART OF THE 3.5 MILLION. ALL RIGHT. AND DO YOU RECALL WHAT THE ALLOCATION WAS IN THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR 2425? IT'S ABOUT THE SAME AMOUNT. OKAY. AND NONE OF THESE THREE IDENTIFIED USES OF THE FUNDS IS FOR STREET REPAIRS. IS THAT CORRECT? ON THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT? YES, THAT IS CORRECT. THEREFORE, TRAFFIC SIGNALS, CROSSWALK PAINTING AND BRIDGE REPAIR. NONE FOR STREETS. RIGHT. THAT IS CORRECT. ALL RIGHT. WHAT IS THE CONDITION OF THE WILDWOOD? OVER TRINITY RIVER AND MOCKINGBIRD OVER WHITE ROCK CREEK BRIDGES? ARE THEY IN SERIOUS STRUCTURAL CONDITION? SO THE THE WELLWOOD BRIDGE HAS SOME DECK DETERIORATION ISSUES. AND THE MOCKINGBIRD BRIDGE HAS SOME EMBANKMENT STABILIZATION CHALLENGES. SO THE BRIDGE STRUCTURES THEMSELVES ARE NOT IMPERILED. IT'S A MATTER OF REPAVING ONE STREET AND ENHANCING THE EMBANKMENT ON ANOTHER. WELL, THE THE WHEN THERE IS A DECK ISSUE ON A BRIDGE, IT IT IS MORE OF A STRUCTURAL ITEM THAT NEEDS TO BE DEALT WITH. AND ARE THESE TWO BRIDGES ON THE NEEDS INVENTORY? THEY ARE. ARE THERE OTHER BRIDGES THAT ARE ON THE NEEDS INVENTORY? THERE ARE OTHER BRIDGES. YES. AND DO YOU PRIORITIZE THESE TWO BRIDGES OVER ALL OF THE OTHERS THAT NEED REPAIR. WE DO PRIORITIZE THEM BASED ON URGENT ACTION THAT NEEDS TO TAKE PLACE FOR TO MAINTAIN THE INTEGRITY OF THE STRUCTURE. BUT THESE WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE 2024 BOND PROGRAM. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. AND I ASSUME THAT'S BECAUSE THEY WERE CONSIDERED TO BE OF LOWER PRIORITY THAN THE BOND FUNDED PROJECTS. WELL, THE THESE BRIDGES ARE IF THEY ARE CURRENTLY ON MY LIST, TO BE HANDLED THROUGH THE CURRENT BUDGET, IF THE BUDGET IS APPROVED AS IT IS. OKAY. SO THE INCREASED BUDGET THAT THE CITY MANAGER HAS INCLUDED FOR YOUR DEPARTMENT WILL COVER THESE BRIDGE REPAIRS WITH THE ALREADY OR THE THE PROPOSED ALLOCATED FUNDS. THAT IS CORRECT. BUT ALSO AGAIN ANY INFLUX OF FUNDS THAT WILL GO TOWARDS BRIDGES WILL ALLOW US TO ADDRESS OTHER BRIDGES. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. MAYOR. MR. BAZALDUA, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY A COUPLE OF THINGS. ONE IN PARTICULAR. YOU MENTIONED THAT THERE WAS NO DESIGNATION FOR REPAIR OF STREETS, BUT THESE SPECIFY SPECIFIC BRIDGES. ARE THOSE BRIDGES FOR STREETS? THAT IS CORRECT. SO IT'S A THOROUGHFARE WHERE OUR RESIDENTS ARE DRIVING. THAT IS CORRECT. THE AGAIN, I MEAN, TO AS A REMINDER, THE CITY OF DALLAS HAS 648 BRIDGES, AND THE BRIDGES ARE PART OF THE SYSTEM. YEAH. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE BECAUSE IT WAS IT WAS IT WAS HINTED AT THE FACT THAT THERE WASN'T ANYTHING, [02:00:03] ANY REPAIRS FOR THE STREETS. AND I THINK THAT THAT JUST BECAUSE THE STREET COMES OVER A BRIDGE STRUCTURE DOESN'T DIFFERENTIATE. WE HAVE A NEED FOR IT. AND THAT'S WHAT THE SURVEY SAID. AND SO I WAS HOPING THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO PRIORITIZE THAT. BUT THEN ALSO WHEN IT'S MENTIONED ABOUT THE CROSSWALKS, CAN YOU SPEAK TO THE DEFERRED MAINTENANCE NEED THAT WE HAVE? I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU SAID THAT WE HAVE NOT ESSENTIALLY INCREASED YEAR OVER YEAR WHAT IT IS THAT WE'RE INVESTING IN IT. SO WHAT IS OUR DEFERRED MAINTENANCE NEED AND WHAT WHAT IS THE LIFE OF THE PLAN? SO, AS NOTED IN MY PRESENTATION TO COUNCIL ON JUNE 5TH, 2025 I NOTED THAT THE OUR BUDGET IS BASED ON AN AVERAGE OF 5 TO 7 YEARS OF REFRESHING, REFRESHING THE CROSSWALKS. ON THAT. I MEAN, IF WE STAY ON THAT CYCLE, THE AVERAGE NEED IS ABOUT THREE AND A HALF TO $4 MILLION A YEAR. SO WITH ANY INCREASE IN PAVEMENT MARKINGS, ESPECIALLY FOR CROSSWALKS, WILL ALLOW US TO REDUCE THE FREQUENCY OR THE REFRESH CYCLE ON ON SOME OF THE CROSSWALKS. AND GENERALLY SPEAKING, WE PRIORITIZE THEM BASED ON AREAS SUCH AS AROUND SCHOOLS AND PARKS AND AND SO ON. AND I WILL JUST SAY FROM CALLS THAT I'VE GOTTEN, I MEAN, JUST HERE IN THE PAST IN THIS CURRENT SCHOOL YEAR, I'VE HAD TO SPEAK WITH YOUR DEPARTMENT ABOUT GETTING CROSSWALKS SPECIFICALLY AROUND SCHOOLS. SO IF THIS WAS BEING ADEQUATELY FUNDED YEAR OVER YEAR, I DON'T THINK THAT WE'D BE MAKING SPECIFIC REQUESTS AS COUNCIL MEMBERS TO ADDRESS THE SAFETY OF OUR KIDS WALKING TO AND FROM SCHOOL. AND, AND SO ADDING THIS TO WHAT HAS ALREADY BEEN THERE AND THE DEMAND THAT YOU ALREADY HAVE THAT IS UNIQUE. THIS YEAR, OVER THIS PAST YEAR, WE HAVE THE TWO YEARS THAT WE'RE FUNDING AT THE SAME LEVEL. HOWEVER, THIS YEAR YOU ARE UNIQUELY UTILIZING A LARGER PORTION SPECIFICALLY FOR THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT IN PREPARATION FOR THE FIFA GAMES. IS THAT ACCURATE? THAT IS CORRECT. 300,000 IS SPECIFIC FOR THE DOWNTOWN IMPROVEMENTS, AND THAT'S MORE THAN WHAT WE DID IN THE PREVIOUS YEAR AT THE SAME FUNDING LEVEL. AS FAR AS THE DOWNTOWN IS CONCERNED FOR THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT? YES. SO WITH THAT SPECIFIC NEED, WE'RE ALREADY DRAWING MORE FROM THE SAME FUNDING LEVEL. AND I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE SHORE THAT UP AND GIVE US A LITTLE BIT MORE FLEXIBILITY FOR THINGS LIKE SCHOOL CROSSING CROSSINGS TO BE PROPERLY MARKED FOR SAFETY. THANK YOU, MISTER MAYOR. MISS BLAIR, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO. THANK YOU, MISTER MAYOR. DOCTOR, CAN YOU PLEASE EXPLAIN TO ME? I KNOW THAT ON CAMP WISDOM AND RACINE. I WOULD SHARE THAT THAT TRAFFIC SIGNAL WITH COUNCIL MEMBER GRACEY. IS THAT NOT CORRECT? I BELIEVE SO, THAT IS CORRECT. AND I DON'T. CAN YOU HELP ME UNDERSTAND THE. IS THIS ON A NEEDS INVENTORY AS RIGHT RIGHT NOW? CURRENTLY IT IS. IT IS A WARRANTED TRAFFIC SIGNAL, MEANING THAT THE LOCATION DOES NOT HAVE A TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT THE LOCATION, AND WE NEED TO PUT IN A TRAFFIC SIGNAL. AND IT HAD AND THEN USUALLY BEFORE WE PUT IN A TRAFFIC SIGNAL, WE HAVE TO RUN WHAT WE CALL THE WARRANT ANALYSIS, AND IT IS WARRANTED. OKAY. SO HOW LONG HAS IT BEEN ON THE ON THE WANTED LIST? I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION WITH ME. I'LL HAVE TO FOLLOW UP WITH THAT. AND IS IF I IF I'M IN MY MIND, I'M LOOKING AT THE STREET. IT'S NOT FAR FROM FROM INTERSTATE 35. CORRECT. THAT IS CORRECT. AND IT'S RIGHT THERE. THERE'S A ON. D3 THERE IS. THERE IS A A DISD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL JUST NORTH AND A CHARTER SCHOOL. CORRECT. IS IT TRAFFIC WARRANTED? THE POINT I'M TRYING TO GET TO IS THE TRAFFIC WARRANTED BASED ON THE NEED OF. PROVIDING SAFETY FOR KIDS TO GET ACROSS A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE TO GET TO AND FROM SCHOOL. SO AGAIN, I DON'T HAVE THE DETAIL OF INFORMATION. HAPPY TO FOLLOW UP ON WHAT WHAT WARRANT THIS TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTED UNDER. [02:05:02] BUT I KNOW THAT IT IS WARRANTED AND IT IS ON OUR LIST OF PROJECTS THAT WE NEED TO IMPLEMENT THE SAME. WOULD THAT BE THE SAME? RESPONSE WHEN I IF I ASK THE QUESTION THE SAME QUESTIONS IN REGARDS TO THE THE LOCATION AT SAINT AUGUSTINE AND SILVER FALLS? THAT IS CORRECT. AND WE'LL FOLLOW UP ON THAT. OKAY. THANK YOU. MISS BLACKMON, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. SO GUS, ARE YOU. SO YOU'RE TELLING ME, ARE ALL THREE OF THESE ON THE LIST FOR A TRAFFIC SIGNAL? YOU'VE DONE THE STUDY. THERE'S SIGNIFICANT CRASH DATA. I THINK EVERYTHING IN D9 HAS CRACKED. I MEAN, IS A WARRANTED INTERSECTION, SO I KNOW THAT IT'S A HIGH THRESHOLD. BUT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING HERE IS ALL THREE OF THESE ARE WARRANTED. YES, MA'AM. THE LISTED THESE TRAFFIC SIGNALS ARE ALL WARRANTED FOR A NEW TRAFFIC SIGNAL LOCATION. AND SO THEY'RE THEY'RE READY TO GO. YOU JUST NEED THE FUNDING TO GET IT DONE. THAT IS CORRECT. SO IS THIS KIND OF LIKE LIFE AND DEATH, SAFETY ISSUE, VISION ZERO STUFF? I MEAN, IS THIS REALLY THESE WILL PREVENT FUTURE ACCIDENTS? THAT IS CORRECT. AGAIN, JUST A REMINDER. I MEAN, WE AT THE MOMENT, THE LAST TIME I CHECKED, WE HAVE ABOUT 50 TRAFFIC SIGNALS THAT ARE WARRANTED. AND THE 2024 BOND IS FUNDING ABOUT TWO THIRDS OF THEM OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. SO WE ARE WE DO HAVE A PROCESS IN WHICH THOSE TAKEN CARE OF BECAUSE WHAT WE SHOULD DO A STUDY AND THEN WE SHOULD IMPLEMENT THE FINDINGS. THAT IS CORRECT. THIS IS ALL FEDERALLY. I MEAN, WE HAVE TO COMPLY WITH FEDERAL RULES WHEN WE DO THE. OKAY. SO THEN I KNOW THAT MOCKINGBIRD OVER FISHER BRIDGE, AND I THINK IT'S AS OLD AS MY DAD. SO I MEAN, I THINK IT'S PROBABLY ONE OF THE ORIGINALS. AND AS YOU SAID, IT'S ERODING BECAUSE IT'S RIGHT THERE. IT GOES RIGHT INTO A, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A WHOLE CREEK AND A WHOLE. SO WHAT IS YOUR PLAN ON THAT? AND AND IF WE DON'T FUND IT WHAT IS YOUR PLAN TO GET IT FIXED? WELL, WE HAVE TO GO WITH THE ALTERNATIVE THAT WE HAVE WITH WHATEVER CURRENT FUNDING THAT WE HAVE TO TRY TO STABILIZE IT. OKAY. AND SO WE WILL PROBABLY DO YOU HAVE THAT FUNDING? I HAVE SOME FUNDS TO STABILIZE, BUT NOT NECESSARILY TO DO THE WORK TO COMPLETE THE WORK. SO THERE'S A DIFFERENCE. SLIGHT DIFFERENCE HERE IS A TO STABILIZE MEANING THAT I DON'T LOSE. LIKE FOR EXAMPLE, THE EMBANKMENT VERSUS COMPLETING THE FULL WORK OF PUTTING IN THE NEW RIPRAP OR WHATEVER. I MEAN, OTHER ITEMS TO PROLONG THE LIFE. CORRECT. OKAY. AND SO HOW LONG DO YOU KNOW? YOU DON'T KNOW HOW OLD THE BRIDGE IS, RIGHT? I DON'T. THE LENGTH OF THE BRIDGE? YEAH. NO, NOT THE LENGTH, BUT THE AGE. I DON'T HAVE IT HERE. OKAY. BECAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S PRETTY. JUST LOOKING AT THE DESIGN OF IT AND MATERIALS, IT'S. TO THE BEST OF MY RECOLLECTION, IT'S PROBABLY IN THE 1970S ISH TYPE FRAME. AND SO DO YOU THINK IT HAS ANY MORE LIFE IN IT? LIKE, WOULD YOU SAY FIVE YEARS, TEN YEARS? TWO WEEKS? THE BRIDGE IS IN GOOD STRUCTURAL CONDITION. OKAY. BECAUSE THOSE BRIDGES AGAIN, BY FEDERAL RULES, EVERY SINGLE BRIDGE THAT WE HAVE IN THE CITY IS INSPECTED EVERY TWO YEARS. OKAY. MINIMUM. AND WE GET A HEALTH REPORT ON ALL OF THEM. SO ALL OUR BRIDGES ARE IN IN GOOD CONDITION. AND IF THERE IS ONE THAT NEEDS IMMEDIATE ACTION, WE WILL TAKE ACTION. OKAY. SO THIS IS A THIS IS A SAFETY ISSUE. IT IS ALWAYS A PRIORITY. OKAY. SO IT JUST NEEDS STABILIZING TO ENSURE AT THE MOMENT. YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN GRACEY RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. AND I JUST WANTED TO FOLLOW UP WITH MY COLLEAGUE, COUNCILWOMAN BLAIR'S QUESTION REGARDING IT BEING ON A NEEDS LIST, I THINK IS WHAT YOU SAID CORRECT? AND IF THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. AND IF IT'S ON A NEEDS LIST, DOES THAT NECESSARILY MEAN IT'S IT'S THERE'S FUNDING AVAILABLE OR IT'S A WISH LIST? JUST SO I'M CLEAR. NO. SO BASED ON MY HISTORY WITH THE CITY, I'VE BEEN HERE SEVEN YEARS OR SO. IS ALL OF THE WARRANTED SIGNALS HAVE BEEN FUNDED THROUGH THE BOND PROGRAMS. SO WE'VE HAD SOME THAT HAVE BEEN FUNDED IN THE 2017 BOND, AND WE CURRENTLY HAVE A LIST OF THE SIGNALS THAT ARE WARRANTED THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED BY THE VOTERS TO BE FUNDED IN THE 2024 BOND. SO DEFINITELY WE STILL HAVE THE LIST IS GROWING. WE ALWAYS KEEP THE LIST. SURE. AND NOT ALL OF THE WARRANTED TRAFFIC SIGNALS ARE FUNDED, SO SO THAT'S WHY, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, YOU WILL SEE SOME THAT ARE PUT FORWARD FOR FUNDING THAT ARE NOT CURRENTLY UNDER THE 2017, [02:10:02] 2024 BOND. UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU. SIR. MR. RESENDEZ RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I'LL BE SUPPORTING THIS AMENDMENT. YOU KNOW, IT'S RELATED TO VISION ZERO. AND FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, INVESTING ROBUSTLY IN VISION ZERO IS NOT OPTIONAL. IT'S A LIFE SAVING COMMITMENT. REDUCING TRAFFIC FATALITIES MEANS FEWER GRIEVING FAMILIES, FEWER TRAGEDIES ON OUR STREETS, AND SAFER NEIGHBORHOODS FOR EVERYONE FROM CHILDREN WALKING TO SCHOOL TO SENIORS CROSSING THE STREET. THAT'S WHY I BELIEVE THAT CUTTING VISION ZERO, AS SOME HAVE PUBLICLY ADVOCATED FOR IS NOT FISCAL PRUDENCE. IT'S GAMBLING WITH LIVES. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MISS MENDELSOHN CHAIRWOMAN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU. WELL, DOCTOR CARLY, YOU IMPRESSIVELY RATTLED OFF THAT THERE ARE 648 BRIDGES IN DALLAS. I DIDN'T KNOW THAT. SO GOOD FUN FACT TODAY. WOULD YOU HAPPEN TO KNOW HOW MANY LANE MILES THERE ARE? 11,740 SOME MILES. OKAY, WELL, 40 SOMETHING. I'LL JUST SAY THAT MEANS I DIDN'T PLANT THAT QUESTION WITH YOU. SO FOR, FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES, MAKE IT 11,750. OKAY. OKAY. VERY GOOD. AND THE NEEDS INVENTORY LIST IS VERY IMPORTANT. AND RESIDENTS SHOULD KNOW THAT WHEN THEY IDENTIFY A STREET, THEY CAN CALL 311 AND ADD A STREET SO THAT YOU CAN EVALUATE IT ON THAT NEEDS INVENTORY. IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT. HOW MANY STREETS ARE ON THE NEEDS INVENTORY LIST? YOU KNOW, I DON'T HAVE THAT ANSWER. IT'S MORE THAN A THOUSAND. I MEAN, LET ME FOLLOW UP ON THAT. I MEAN, I DON'T WANT TO GIVE A NUMBER THAT IS NOT ACCURATE, BUT IT WOULD FOR SURE BE MORE THAN 100, RIGHT? WELL, I MEAN, DEFINITELY. AGAIN WE HAVE A LOT OF LANE MILES IN THE CITY OF DALLAS, AND A LOT OF THEM ARE IN NEED OF SOME SORT OF A TREATMENT. OKAY. WELL, YOU'RE A VERY EXACTING PERSON, SO I'LL LET YOU NOT GIVE AN ESTIMATION. BUT WHAT I'LL TELL YOU IS THAT I KNOW IN MY DISTRICT ALONE, THERE ARE PROBABLY 50 STREETS THAT ARE ON THAT. SO I CAN IMAGINE THERE'S PROBABLY MAYBE EVEN A THOUSAND STREETS, IF NOT MORE, THAT ARE ON THAT NEEDS INVENTORY. AND THE PROBLEM WITH THIS AMENDMENT IS THAT WE SHOULD NOT BE SITTING HERE. SELECTING A PROJECT LIKE THIS MIGHT BE NUMBER 40 ON YOUR LIST, OR IT MIGHT BE NUMBER 500 ON YOUR LIST. WE DON'T HAVE THAT CONTEXT, AND THAT'S WHY WE HAVE PROFESSIONAL STAFF AND WHY WE SHOULD BE ASKING FOR FLEXIBLE DOLLARS FOR OUR PROFESSIONAL STAFF TO IMPLEMENT THE MOST URGENT REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE. AND I'LL JUST SAY ONE OTHER BIT IS THAT RECENTLY YOU CLOSED PART OF HILLCREST ROAD IN DISTRICT 11. I WAS UNPREPARED THAT DAY. IT WAS DOWN TO ONE LANE. IT'S USUALLY A THREE LANE EACH DIRECTION. AND YOU KNOW, I ASKED YOU ABOUT IT AND YOU SAID THERE WAS EMERGENCY REPAIRS NEEDED ON THAT BRIDGE. SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK YOU'RE DOING THE WORK THAT'S NECESSARY TO KEEP OUR BRIDGES IN GOOD REPAIR. BUT AGAIN, I WOULD LIKE FOR YOU TO HAVE ADDITIONAL MONEY ALONG WITH PUBLIC SAFETY. I THINK OUR STREETS ARE THE PRIORITY FOR THE CITY. WE'LL ADD IN PARKS AS WELL. BUT I DON'T WANT TO BE THE PERSON BECAUSE I'M NOT QUALIFIED TO BE THE PERSON THAT SELECTS WHICH ROADS HAPPEN. WHEN. THANK YOU. DID YOU HAVE. YOU LOOK LIKE YOU WERE GOING TO SAY SOMETHING. DID YOU WANT TO SAY ANYTHING? DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING YOU WERE GOING TO SAY? NO. JUST TO CLARIFY, THE I JUST I WASN'T SURE IF I SAID IT, BUT THE 11,750 ARE LANE MILES. YES. NO, JUST JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT. THANK YOU. MISS BLAIR, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU. NUMBER TWO. I THIS IS A QUESTION I ACTUALLY FORGOT TO ASK BASED ON WHAT THIS MEMO WAS SAYING, EACH ONE OF THESE COMPLETE STREET LIGHTS OR TRAFFIC SIGNALS WOULD BE $500,000 IF IT'S AT 1.5 MILLION. YEAH, WE'RE AVERAGING ABOUT JUST CONSTRUCTION COSTS BETWEEN, DEPENDING ON THE, THE BID AND THE LOCATION. WE'RE AVERAGING BETWEEN 500 TO $550,000 PER TRAFFIC SIGNAL. CONSTRUCTION COSTS. COST. OUCH! DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM BE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO. THANK YOU. I'LL BE BRIEF. WELL, THANK YOU SO MUCH, DOCTOR. I THINK YOU'VE GIVEN US A LOT OF FACTS AND A LOT OF NUMBERS SO THAT PEOPLE CAN BEGIN TO WRAP THEIR HEAD AROUND HOW MUCH THERE IS TO MAINTAIN AND HOW MUCH WE'VE GOT TO TAKE CARE OF WHAT TOUCHES OUR RESIDENTS LIVES EVERY SINGLE DAY, WHETHER IT COMES TO OUR 648 BRIDGES, WHICH I WOULD HAVE NEVER GUESSED EITHER, OR 11,700 LANE MILES. [02:15:05] OBVIOUSLY PEDESTRIAN SAFETY. DRIVING IN YOUR CAR, YOU WANT TO BE SAFE. CROSSWALKS, TRAFFIC SIGNALS, ETC.. SO I'M I'M FOR ALL OF THOSE THINGS. HOWEVER, I'M NOT FOR INCREASING THE TAX RATE, SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE THAT. IF YOU THINK YOUR STAFF HAS CAPACITY TO BE ABLE TO ADD MORE TO THIS, OR IF THERE ARE SOME THAT JUST DIDN'T QUITE MAKE IT ON THE LIST, BUT THAT ARE URGENT THAT WE FIND A PLACE THAT THOSE COULD BE FUNDED AND MAKE A PRIORITY DECISION. BUT I'M NOT SUPPORTING THIS BECAUSE I DON'T BELIEVE IN THIS. I SUPPORT, I'M NOT SUPPORTING IT BECAUSE I JUST DON'T WANT TO SEE US CHANGE THIS RECOMMENDED TAX RATE. THANK YOU, MR. ROTH. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO. JUST AS A JUST AS A POINT OF CLARIFICATION, THERE ARE BOND FUNDS THAT ARE AVAILABLE FOR PART FOR PORTION OF THIS OF THESE TYPES OF PROJECTS. I'M SORRY, JUST THERE ARE BOND FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR THESE TYPES OF CAPITAL PROJECTS IN THE REPLACEMENTS IN THE BUDGET AS PROPOSED BY THE CITY MANAGER, WE HAVE $3.4 MILLION FOR BRIDGE MAINTENANCE IN THE CURRENT BUDGET. AND WE'VE GOT, AS I STATED EARLIER, 3.5 MILLION IN PAVEMENT MARKINGS IN THE CURRENT BUDGET. AND THEN ARE THERE OTHER CAPITAL FUNDS AND OTHER BUCKETS AND OTHER OPPORTUNITIES FOR LONGER TERM AND LARGER CAPITAL PROJECTS FOR REPLACEMENTS AND AND LARGER PROJECTS TO RATHER THAN MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR? SO GENERALLY SPEAKING, ALL CAPITAL IS THROUGH THE BOND PROGRAM OR THROUGH THE COMBINATION OF PARTNERSHIP WITH PARTNERING AGENCIES SUCH AS THE NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS OR THE COUNTIES. IT SOUNDS LIKE TO ME THAT AND I'M ASKING YOU, WOULD YOU FEEL LIKE THERE'D BE SUFFICIENT FUNDS FOR PRIORITIZING EMERGENCY OR SIGNIFICANTLY. PROXIMITY APPROXIMATED NEEDED FUNDS FOR EMERGENCY OR SERIOUS CAPITAL REPAIRS THROUGH THOSE DIFFERENT VENUES. SO AS I STATED EARLIER, THE CITY MANAGER HAS PUT FORWARD A GOOD BUDGET AND WELL BALANCED BUDGET TO ADDRESS THESE THINGS. AND I THINK OUR CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER CAN SPEAK TO EMERGENCIES IN CASE THERE ARE SOME UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES THAT CAN LEAD TO THOSE NEEDS. YES, SIR. JACK GARLAND, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER. THE CITY DOES HAVE RESERVE FUNDS. IF THERE WERE SOME TYPE OF SAFETY ISSUE THAT REQUIRED IMMEDIATE ATTENTION WE COULD COME TO COUNCIL AND USE EMERGENCY FUNDS AFTER WE HAD INVESTIGATED FUNDS THAT ARE ALREADY WITHIN THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT TO MAKE SURE THERE'S NONE AVAILABLE THERE. IF THERE'S A SAFETY ISSUE, WE WOULD NOT LET IT GO. THANK YOU, I WOULD. I'M NOT GOING TO BE SUPPORTING THIS. I THINK THAT RAISING THE TAX RATE IS NOT APPROPRIATE AT THIS POINT. AND I THINK IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE ARE SUFFICIENT FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR THE REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE AS WELL AS FOR ANY SERIOUS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS. AND I WOULD SUGGEST THAT THIS I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS PARTICULAR AMENDMENT. MR. RIDLEY RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MR. KENT CALI, THE ISSUE OF WHETHER VISION ZERO IS APPROPRIATELY FUNDED IN THIS BUDGET HAS BEEN RAISED. YOU HAVE JUST SAID IN YOUR LAST COMMENTS THAT YOU BELIEVE THE CITY MANAGER HAS PRESENTED A VERY BALANCED, APPROPRIATE BUDGET FOR YOUR DEPARTMENT. CAN YOU TELL US HOW MUCH THE ALLOCATION FOR VISION ZERO IS? AND I BELIEVE MY RECOLLECTION IS THAT IT INCREASED OVER LAST YEAR. IS THAT CORRECT? THE CURRENT BUDGET HAS ABOUT $1.6 MILLION IN VISION ZERO, AND WE FULLY INTEND ON LEVERAGING THAT THOSE FUNDS WITH THE FEDERAL GRANT THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE, THAT AMOUNTS TO ABOUT $9 MILLION. SO THAT WE CAN BEGIN IMPLEMENTATION OF IMPROVEMENTS ON AROUND FIVE CORRIDORS THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED IN THE GRANT. GREAT. SO, GIVEN THAT ABUNDANT FUNDING AND THE EXISTENCE OF SUFFICIENT BUDGET ALLOCATIONS TO COVER THE REPAIRS TO THE TWO BRIDGES AND THE BOND FUNDING FOR AT LEAST TWO THIRDS OF THE 50 WARRANTED TRAFFIC SIGNALS, I DO NOT SEE THAT WE NEED TO RAISE OUR TAX RATE TO FUND THESE PARTICULAR ITEMS, PARTICULARLY WHERE IT WOULD INTRUDE UPON THE STAFF'S PROFESSIONAL ASSESSMENT OF JUST WHAT OUR [02:20:04] HIGHEST NEEDS ARE. I, I PREFER TO PRESERVE THAT FLEXIBILITY AND THAT DISCRETION ON THE PART OF OUR STAFF, AND I DO NOT WANT TO RAISE OUR TAX RATE. MRS BLACKMON YOU RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO. THANK YOU. HOW? HOW? I GUESS IT'S EITHER FOR MR. BAZALDUA OR. OR MR.. HOW DID THIS LIST COME ABOUT? DID YOU WORK WITH THE AUTHOR ON PICKING PROJECTS OR DID THE CITY MANAGER? I'M JUST KIND OF CURIOUS. WE WERE ASKED TO PROVIDE ANY INTERSECTIONS THAT ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THE IMMEDIACY, AND THIS IS THE LIST THAT WE PROVIDED. SO EITHER BOND OR BUDGET BUT HAD A NEED. THIS IS WHAT CAME ABOUT. WELL, THERE WOULD BE A NEED WHERE IF WE COULD ADVANCE THE WORK. I THINK MR. LEE HAS TALKED ABOUT THE WAY WE LOOK AT THE ACTUAL CONDITIONS. IF SOMETHING CAN ACTUALLY BE STABILIZED, WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT THE BRIDGES, OR DO WE NEED TO GO IN AND DO A COMPLETE RECONSTRUCTION? AND SO THAT'S HOW WE LOOK AT THE ENTIRE INVENTORY ACROSS THE ENTIRE CITY. OKAY. SO YOU DIDN'T IT WASN'T JUST THROW DARTS AT THE MAP AND PICK ONE. IT WAS DONE WITH THOUGHT AND PRIORITIZATION. AND THERE WAS SOME YOU KNOW, THERE WAS A LOOK AT IT. EVERYTHING THAT WE DO, WE WE APPROACH IT FROM A STRATEGIC LENS AND MAKING SURE THAT WE TRULY UNDERSTAND WHAT THE NEEDS ARE. AND IT'S NOT A DART THROWING EXERCISE. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. AND I GUESS JACK OR JEANETTE, ARE WE INCREASING THE TAX RATE HERE? WE'VE HAD A COUPLE PEOPLE SAY INCREASE IN THE TAX RATE. I'M KIND OF CURIOUS. SO FROM WHAT THE CURRENT IS TO WHAT THIS IS PROPOSING. YES. YES, MA'AM. SO THE CURRENT TAX RATE IN THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR IS 70.4 $0.07. THE CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDED A REDUCTION OF 0.50, REDUCING 0.25 ON DEBT SERVICE AND REDUCING 0.25 ON THE GENERAL FUND, FOR A TOTAL OF 69.9 $0.07. WHEN Y'ALL VOTED TO SET THE TAX RATE CEILING, YOU SET THE GENERAL FUND BACK TO THE CURRENT YEAR'S LEVEL. YOU KEPT THE REDUCTION IN THE DEBT SERVICE THAT MISS TOLBERT RECOMMENDED, BUT THE CEILING HAS BEEN SET SO THAT YOU CAN GO UP TO THE CURRENT YEAR'S GENERAL FUND, AND THAT IS A TOTAL OF 70.2 $0.02. 222 WHAT? TWO $0.02 PER $100 OF VALUATION. SO THE THE FIRST AMENDMENT FAILED. AND SO THAT WAS WORTH 0.01 $0.03. SO THAT'S GOING TO COME OFF OF IT. IT DEPENDS ON WHAT HAPPENS ON THE REMAINDER OF THE AMENDMENTS. BUT RIGHT NOW THESE TWO ITEMS WELL WE'RE SPEAKING ON NUMBER TWO. THIS IS HIGHER THAN THE MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION, BUT IT IS LOWER. JUST THIS ONE ITEM WOULD BE LOWER THAN THE CURRENT YEAR GENERAL FUND. OKAY. YEAH. BECAUSE I'M TRYING TO KEEP IT APPLES TO APPLES. AND YOU WERE KIND OF GOING INTO THE ORANGE BIN. SO SO THIS DOESN'T ACTUALLY INCREASE THE CURRENT TAX RATE. IT JUST IT'S AFFECTING THE MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED RATE. IT IS. IT IS AN INCREASE FROM THE MANAGERS. IT'S AN INCREASE FROM THE MANAGERS, BUT IT IS A DECREASE FROM THE CURRENT GENERAL FUND. SO EVEN OUR CEILING IS A DECREASE FROM THE CURRENT. YES, MA'AM. OKAY. I JUST NEEDED TO UNDERSTAND THAT BECAUSE I THINK THERE WAS A LOT OF CONFUSION THERE. THANK YOU. MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I WILL NOT BE VOTING ON THIS ITEM OR ANY ITEM THAT INCREASES THE CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED TAX RATE. GUS, CAN YOU TELL ME HOW MANY ADDITIONAL DOLLARS WE'RE GETTING THROUGH DART FOR CROSSWALKS OR OTHER PROJECTS THAT COULD BE SUPPORTED THROUGH TRANSPORTATION? WE STILL HAVE ABOUT $1.6 MILLION FROM THE SORRY. GIVE ME ONE SECOND. I MEAN, WE INITIALLY HAD $2 MILLION IN PAVEMENT MARKINGS, AND I THINK THE BALANCE IN THE FROM THE DART FUNDS IS ABOUT 500 TO 1 MILLION. I'LL FOLLOW UP ON THE EXACT NUMBER AND HOW MUCH WE STILL HAVE. AND WHAT'S THE FLEXIBILITY WITHIN THAT BUDGET. IT HAS TO BE USED ON THE DART ROUTES, WHETHER IT BE IN TRANSIT OR BUS. OKAY. AND THEN CURRENTLY, WHAT'S THE TIME LAG ON ORDERING AND GETTING A TRAFFIC SIGNAL MANUFACTURED? SO FOR FABRICATION PURPOSES, THAT IS A SIX MONTHS LEAD TIME AVERAGE. [02:25:05] OKAY. AND THEN EARLIER YOU SPOKE ABOUT MATCH DOLLARS AND OPPORTUNITIES WITH DIFFERENT AGENCIES. TYPICALLY, WHAT IS THE FUNDING SOURCE FOR A NEW TRAFFIC SIGNAL? FOR A NEW TRAFFIC SIGNAL THAT'S NOT THERE CURRENTLY. DOES IT COME THROUGH THE BOND OR DOES IT COME THROUGH THE BUDGET? GENERALLY SPEAKING IT IS FROM THE BOND. OKAY. OKAY. AND LASTLY I THINK WE ALL HAVE TRAFFIC SIGNALS THAT ARE WARRANTED IN, IN OUR DISTRICTS. AND SO REALLY APPRECIATE THE COMMENT THAT, THAT WAS MADE EARLIER FROM CITY MANAGER WITH THAT'S ALL I HAVE. MAYOR. THANK YOU. MR. BAZALDUA. YOU RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE ON YOUR AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO. THANK YOU, MAYOR. AND AND JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY A FEW THINGS. I THINK MISS BLACKMON ALREADY DID. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE DOCTOR CARLY, YOUR YOUR OFFICE AND THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE WERE CONSULTED AND PRIORITIZING SPECIFIC PROJECTS THAT WERE IDENTIFIED IN HERE. IT WAS NOT AN EXERCISE WHERE I JUST CHOSE RANDOM PIECES, AND THE ONES THAT ARE IDENTIFIED ARE NOT SPECIFICALLY ALREADY ADDRESSED IN OUR BOND PACKAGE. YES. OKAY. I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT WAS CLARIFIED. AND ALSO JACK, COULD YOU JUST QUANTIFY I KNOW THAT WE TALK A LOT ABOUT THE RATE AND MORE HIGH LEVEL THIS PARTICULAR AMENDMENT, THE .12 $0.04. CAN YOU EQUATE THAT TO THE VALUE OR COST, IF YOU WILL, TO THE TAXPAYER? SO APPROXIMATELY THIS IS A VERY APPROXIMATE NUMBER OF ABOUT $3 A YEAR. SO THIS FOR A INDIVIDUAL THAT HAS THE MEDIAN VALUED HOME. SO FOR LESS OR $3 AROUND WE COULD POTENTIALLY TAKE AN ACTION TO BRING MORE INFRASTRUCTURE AND SAVE LIVES IN OUR CITY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MR. RESENDEZ, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR YOU, DOCTOR KOCARLI. IS THERE A DOLLAR AMOUNT AVAILABLE IN TERMS OF WHAT THE CITY'S NEEDS ARE AS IT RELATES TO VISION ZERO? WELL, AGAIN, VISION ZERO IS A FRAMEWORK AND NOT A PROJECT. AS I MENTIONED IN MY PREVIOUS PRESENTATIONS. LIKE, YOU KNOW, THE JUNE 5TH, 2025 PRESENTATION IS EVERY TRAFFIC SIGNAL THAT IS FUNDED THROUGH THE HIGHWAY SAFETY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, FOR EXAMPLE, IS A VISION ZERO ITEM. EVERY PROJECT WHERE WE'RE MAKING IMPROVEMENTS TO A GEOMETRY ON A, ON AN INTERSECTION OR SOMETHING IS A VISION ZERO ITEM. SO IT'S A FRAMEWORK. AND WHAT WE HAVE, THOUGH IS THIS BUDGET HAS SOME FUNDING. THAT IS UNDER THE VISION ZERO PROGRAM THAT IS ALLOWING US TO LEVERAGE THOSE FUNDS THROUGH PARTNERING AGENCIES TO IMPLEMENT. SO WITHIN THAT FRAMEWORK, ARGUABLY THE NEEDS ARE IN THE BILLIONS, I'M SORRY, WITHIN THE VISION ZERO FRAMEWORK. ARGUABLY, ARGUABLY IN ORDER TO MEET OUR VISION ZERO GOALS, THE NEEDS ARE IN THE BILLIONS. IS THAT A SAFE? WELL, WE HAVE WE HAVE LARGE NEEDS, OBVIOUSLY, BECAUSE WE'RE TRYING TO RETROFIT AN EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE TO BE MORE MULTI-MODAL, ACCOMMODATING TO MULTI-MODAL MOVEMENT. SO DEFINITELY THE THE NEED IS IS GREAT. HOWEVER, LIKE I SAID, WE'RE PRIORITIZING IT AND WE'RE ABLE TO DEPLOY IN THE KEY CORRIDORS. THAT'S WHY WE IDENTIFIED THE HIGH INJURY NETWORK. GOT IT. THANK YOU. SO JUST TO ME, IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE WE'RE ANYWHERE NEAR, YOUR FISCALLY, FINANCIALLY NEAR THE ABILITY TO MEET OUR NEEDS IN ORDER TO TO SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETE OR ADDRESS THE FRAMEWORK THAT HAS BEEN PRIORITIZED BY THIS BODY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MR. ROTH, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO. THANK YOU. JUST AS A CLARIFICATION JACK, THE THE SUGGESTED CHANGE IN THE TAX RATE INCREASE FROM THE CITY MANAGER'S SUGGESTED AMOUNTS WOULD REPRESENT DOLLARS OF APPROXIMATELY $2 MILLION, $2.5 MILLION. SO OR IT WOULD BE THE FULL 2.7 50. YEAH. SO? SO THE TAX RATE CEILING WAS SET .5.25 HIGHER THAN THE CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION, WHICH WAS A TOTAL OF $5.5 MILLION. [02:30:01] DOLLARS. AND THESE THREE AMENDMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN LAID OUT AS NUMBERS ONE, TWO AND THREE, TAKE THAT 5.5 MILLION AND CUMULATIVE. THIS GETS THIS SPENDS ALL OF THAT. SO SO JUST TO CLARIFY THE $3 PER PER PERSON. IT'S REALLY 2.75 MILLION ON THIS PARTICULAR ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM. THANK YOU. I WOULD AGAIN NOT BE IN SUPPORTIVE OF, OF INCREASING THE TAX RATE ABOVE THE RECOMMENDED AMOUNT FROM THE CITY MANAGER. THANK YOU. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE. THANK YOU. BECAUSE THERE'S SO MANY PEOPLE THAT WATCH WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT BUDGET. JUST TO CLARIFY, THE CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED BUDGET, WHICH DOES LOWER OUR TAX RATE. CAN YOU TELL US HOW MUCH NEW REVENUE THAT BRINGS TO THE CITY? ONE MOMENT. WE HAVE THE ANSWER. JANETTE WHEATON, BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES. SO THE TOTAL ADDITIONAL REVENUE FOR BOTH THE GENERAL FUND AND DEBT SERVICE IS 65,000,005 69 172 SO 65.6 MILLION. SO IF YOU'RE GETTING 65 MILLION NEW DOLLARS TO THE CITY BUDGET, WHERE ARE YOU GETTING IT FROM? LIKE PEOPLE ARE WRITING A LARGER CHECK. IS THAT CORRECT? SO THE THE INCREASE IN REVENUE REFLECTS THE 3.5% CAP IN NEW CONSTRUCTION. SO EVERYONE'S PROPERTY VALUE IS DIFFERENT. SOME INDIVIDUALS MAY EXPERIENCE A DECLINE IN TAXABLE VALUE AND SOME MAY EXPERIENCE AN INCREASE. SO IT'S HARD TO SAY ACROSS THE BOARD THAT IT'S GOING TO BE A TAX INCREASE. BUT ACROSS THE BOARD, YOU KNOW, THE NET IS YOU'RE GOING TO GET $65 MILLION FROM INCREASES IN FEES AND INCREASE IN PROPERTY TAX. IS THAT CORRECT? TO CLARIFY, THERE'S 65 MILLION IS ACTUALLY JUST FROM PROPERTY TAXES FROM PROPERTY TAX. CORRECT. AND THAT'S TOTAL PROPERTY TAXES, BOTH THE GENERAL FUND SIDE AS WELL AS DEBT SERVICE. AND I BELIEVE TWO WEEKS AGO, JACK, YOU SAID THAT THE INCREASE IN OUR PORTFOLIO, OUR REAL ESTATE PORTFOLIO FOR THE CITY OF TAXABLE PROPERTIES IS A 5.5% INCREASE. IS THAT CORRECT? THE INCREASE IS 5.3. 5.3. OKAY. WELL I'M ROUNDING UP. SO IN GENERAL PEOPLE ARE GOING TO HAVE A 5.3% INCREASE. SO AGAIN EVERYONE'S PROPERTY VALUE IS DIFFERENT. WE INCREASE THE OVER 65 EXEMPTION UP TO 175,000. YES. SOME INDIVIDUALS MAY EXPERIENCE A DECLINE IN THEIR TAXABLE VALUE. SO ACROSS THE CITY, IT VARIES. SO, STATED ANOTHER WAY, SOME PEOPLE MIGHT HAVE A DECREASE, BUT SOME PEOPLE MIGHT PAY A LOT MORE THAN JUST 5.5%. AND THAT'S WHY STAYING FIRM AT THE MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION, WHICH IS STILL AN INCREASE FOR MOST PEOPLE, IS NECESSARY AND NOT TO GO UP TO THE CEILING. THANK YOU. AND JUST A POINT OF CLARIFICATION. THE REAPPRAISAL VALUE IS 3.4%, BUT THE TOTAL INCREASE IS 5.3%. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO IN TODAY'S PACKET? SEEING NONE, PLEASE SIGNIFY YOUR SUPPORT FOR THE AMENDMENT BY RAISING YOUR CITY DALLAS SEAL. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. SEALS RAISED IN FAVOR. I'M SORRY. WILL YOU PLEASE RAISE THEM AGAIN? COUNCIL MEMBERS. BAZALDUA. BLACKMON. RESENDEZ AND GRACEY. WITH ONLY FOUR SEALS BEING RAISED IN FAVOR, THE AMENDMENT FAILS. MR. MAYOR. OKAY, I'M LOOKING FOR MORE MOTIONS. OKAY, MR. MAYOR, DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR A MOTION. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I MOVE TO APPROVE AMENDMENT SIX WITH A CHANGE TO SOURCE OF FUNDS FROM REDUCE PHASE ONE BIKE PLAN ALLOCATION BY 400,000 TO ARPA SEPTIC TANK PROGRAM. AND THIS IS FOR THE USE OF FUNDS TO INCREASE DAS FUNDING BY $400,000, TO EXPAND SPAY NEUTER PROGRAMS, MICROCHIPPING AND VACCINATION EFFORTS TO REDUCE SHELTER INTAKE, STRENGTHEN PUBLIC HEALTH, AND LOWER OPERATIONAL STRAIN. POINT OF PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE. STATE YOUR. I HAD INQUIRED ABOUT GOING IN NUMERIC ORDER, AND YOU HAD SAID THAT IT WAS YOUR INTENT TO RECEIVE THE MOTIONS IN THAT ORDER, DOES THAT MEAN THAT I ASSUME THAT MEANT I ASSUME THAT FIVE WERE WITHDRAWN, THREE, FOUR, AND FIVE WERE NOT BEING LAID OUT? IS THAT RIGHT? NO THAT'S NOT. YOU ACTUALLY ANSWERED HER QUESTION AND SAID THAT THAT IT WAS OPEN TO. [02:35:04] AND SO I WAS JUST GOING IN ORDER BECAUSE YOU GAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY. BUT I DIDN'T SEE IT AS AN OPPORTUNITY THAT PREVENTED OTHER MEMBERS FROM CHIMING IN WHEN YOU GAVE THE FLOOR, MR. MAYOR. WELL, THE INTENT IS TO GO IN THE ORDER. THAT'S WHAT I SAID. SO. CORRECT. I JUST WAS TRYING TO AVOID THE CONFLICT OF THIS POTENTIAL USE OF FUNDS, I MEAN, THE USE OF FUNDS. AND SO IF WE WERE ABLE TO DISPOSE OF THIS POSITIVELY, I COULD MAKE AMENDMENT ON, ON THE FLOOR WITH THE NEXT ONE IN NUMERICAL ORDER. THAT INCLUDES THINGS THAT ARE NOT IN HERS. SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT THAT YOU WANTED YOU INTENTIONALLY DID NOT LAY OUT NUMBER THREE SO THAT WE COULD LAY OUT NUMBER THREE ON SIX? SIX? YES, SIR. TO MY PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY, I WAS ACTUALLY ASKING THAT QUESTION, AND IT HAD BEEN RULED THAT YOU WERE GOING TO GO IN ORDER. YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I SAID. THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I SAID. ACTUALLY, I'LL WITHDRAW MY MOTION. OKAY. OKAY. MAYOR. I'LL MAKE A MOTION THEN. I MOVE TO LAY OUT AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE WITH A SOURCE OF FUNDS FROM THE TAX RATE. I WILL AMEND. SEE, THIS IS WHAT I WAS TRYING TO AVOID. BUT IF I COULD ASK GO AHEAD. I WAS TRYING TO AVOID HAVING TO ON THE FLOOR SLICE THIS, NOT KNOWING WHERE THE OTHER AMENDMENT WAS GOING FOR. SO IF I WERE TO AMEND THIS IF I WERE TO AMEND THIS, I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT CALCULATION FROM OUR CFO'S OFFICE TO REFLECT WHAT THAT WOULD WHAT THAT WOULD BE. IS THERE ANY OBJECTION TO TAKING ITEM SIX OUT OF ORDER. I OBJECT. OKAY. BECAUSE I WOULD HAVE LIKED TO HAVE DONE MINE BEFORE I UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU. I OBJECT. OKAY. LOOK, I'LL PUT IT TO A VOTE OF THE BODY TO SEE HOW PEOPLE FEEL ABOUT TAKING IT. THAT ONE OUT OF ORDER. BUT WE HAVE HISTORICALLY GONE IN THE ORDER THAT THE AMENDMENTS HAVE BEEN FILED. YES, SIR. MAYOR. I'LL JUST. I'LL JUST LAY IT OUT. OKAY. I'LL JUST LAY IT OUT. WE MOVE TO SUBMIT AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE. THAT IS A SOURCE OF FUNDS FROM THE TAX RATE OF A TOTAL OF $2.5 MILLION. USE OF FUNDS IS AN INCREASE IN ANIMAL SERVICES DALLAS ANIMAL SERVICES BY $2.5 MILLION. BROKEN DOWN 500,000 TO INCREASE FUNDING FOR SPAY AND NEUTER SERVICES, INCLUDING MICROCHIPPING AND VACCINATION, TO REDUCE OVERPOPULATION AND DECREASE ANIMAL INTAKE. NUMBER TWO. $300,000 TO SECURE CONTRACTUAL SERVICES TO BOARD ANIMALS IN THE EVENT OF AN OUTBREAK, EMERGENCY OR CAPACITY ISSUES. NUMBER THREE. $200,000 TO CONTRACT VET AND VET TECH SERVICES TO INCREASE IN-HOUSE SURGERIES AND MEDICAL CARE. NUMBER FOUR. $100,000 FOR AFTER HOURS CONTRACTUAL SERVICES FOR VET CARE DURING OVERNIGHT HOURS. NUMBER FIVE. $200,000 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES FOR VET CARE FOR ANIMALS IN FOSTER CARE. AND NUMBER SIX. $1.2 MILLION FOR FACILITIES NEEDS AND UPGRADES, KENNEL REPLACEMENTS AND REPAIRS AND LOBBY IMPROVEMENTS OF DALLAS ANIMAL SERVICES. IS THERE A SECOND FOR THAT? SECOND. ALL RIGHT, SO NOW IT'S ON THE FLOOR. MR. BAZALDUA, WOULD YOU LIKE TO EXPLAIN YOUR AMENDMENT? YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES TO DO SO. THANK YOU. MAYOR. THIS WAS ALSO TO ADDRESS WHAT WE HAVE HAD A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF OUTREACH AND ADVOCACY FOR I BELIEVE PAUL AND HIS TEAM ARE DOING AN AMAZING JOB. HOWEVER, WE HAVE A MUCH HIGHER DEMAND THAN WHAT WE ARE FUNDING, QUITE FRANKLY. THIS BUDGET CYCLE HAS NOT CUTS, BUT REIMAGINING DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS AND HOW WE ARE ABLE TO DELIVER ADEQUATE SERVICES TO OUR RESIDENTS. AND THIS IN PARTICULAR, WE KNOW WE'VE INCREASED, I THINK, BY 2 MILLION IN CURRENT YEAR FOR US TO ACTUALLY HAVE MORE INVESTED IN ANIMAL CRUELTY CASES, WHICH IS SOMETHING WE ALSO HAVE HEARD A GREAT DEAL FROM OUR OUR PUBLIC ON. HOWEVER I WOULD SAY A DAY DOESN'T GO BY WITHOUT MY OFFICE HEARING ABOUT SOMETHING WHEN IT COMES TO ANIMAL SERVICES AND OUR NEED OUT IN THE FIELD. COULD YOU SPEAK TO THE PRIORITIZATION AND WHAT THIS INCREASE TO YOUR BUDGET WOULD DO AND WHAT YOU [02:40:10] BELIEVE THE RESULTS WOULD BE AS WELL? WELL, FIRST OF ALL, PAUL RAMON, DIRECTOR, DALLAS ANIMAL SERVICES, I'D LIKE TO SPEAK TO THE FACT THAT I APPRECIATE THE AS A FRESHMAN IN THIS ROLE THE PARTICIPATION IN COOPERATIVE EFFORT BETWEEN THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE AND DALLAS ANIMAL SERVICES TO PROVIDE A BALANCED BUDGET. IF THIS BODY CHOSE OR THIS COUNCIL CHOSE TO, TO ENHANCE FURTHER THOSE SERVICES WE WOULD LOOK TO WHAT THOSE OPPORTUNITIES ARE AND PROVIDE FOR THE COMMUNITY IS RELATIVE TO WHAT IS OUTLINED HERE. WAS THERE ADDITIONAL THAT YOU WANTED IN THAT ANSWER? COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA THAT I CAN ASSIST YOU WITH? NO, I GUESS I GUESS THAT THAT SUFFICE. THAT WAS SUFFICE. I WANT IT TO BE VERY CLEAR THAT SOME VERY TOUGH DECISIONS WERE MADE FOR THIS BUDGET CYCLE. WE'VE GOT LIBRARIES CLOSING. WE HAVE POTENTIAL FOR PARKS. WE'VE GOT A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT ARE LOSING THEIR JOB ACROSS THE ORGANIZATION THEIR JOBS AS A WHOLE, NOT JUST THE INDIVIDUAL, BUT THE POSITIONS THEMSELVES. AND SO IT'S NOT LOST ON ME THAT THIS BUDGET CYCLE IS, IS A DIFFICULT ONE. BUT AT THE SAME TIME, THROUGH MY BUDGET TOWN HALLS AND HEARING FROM RESIDENTS OF DISTRICT SEVEN AND OTHER VARIOUS DISTRICTS WHO SHOWED UP TO OUR TOWN HALL MEETINGS. NOT ONE TIME WAS I ASKED FOR US TO TRY TO SLASH ANY MORE TAXES. I THINK THERE WAS A LOT OF CONCERN FOR THE RESTRAINTS THAT THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE IS GOING TO PUT ON US IN SUBSEQUENT YEARS. I THINK THERE WAS A LOT OF CONCERN ON SPECIFIC AREAS BEING SOMEWHAT NICKELED AND DIMED, AND ONLY PROVIDING THE BARE MINIMUM. IT DOESN'T ALSO GET LOST ON ME THAT THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS CEILING THAT WE HAVE, THAT THE CAPABILITY OF GOING UP TO IS STILL LESS OF A RATE YEAR OVER YEAR. BUT IT GIVES US A LITTLE BIT OF ROOM AND FLEXIBILITY TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE THINGS THAT ARE NOT ADEQUATELY BEING ADDRESSED IN THE VERY STRATEGIC BUDGET THAT HAS BEEN PROPOSED TO US. IT'S NOT TO SAY THAT THE BUDGET ISN'T A GOOD BUDGET. I THINK THAT IT WAS A GREAT BUDGET, AND I THINK THAT IT CHECKED ALL THE BOXES AND IT LIVES WITHIN THE MEANS AND THE POLITICAL WILL, IF YOU WILL OF WHAT WE HAVE IN FRONT OF US. BUT THE REALITY IS, IS THAT IF WE HAVE A DEPARTMENT LIKE ANIMAL SERVICES THAT IS BUSTING AT THE SEAMS, THAT IS STRUGGLING QUITE FRANKLY, TO DELIVER THAT ADEQUATE SERVICE, WHO WANTS TO BE ABLE TO DO BETTER BUT NEEDS MORE TOOLS. AND I KNOW YOU'RE NOT GOING TO SIT IN FRONT OF YOUR BOSS AND COMPLAIN ABOUT THE BUDGET THAT YOU'VE BEEN GIVEN. I DON'T EXPECT ANY OF THE DIRECTORS OF ANY DEPARTMENTS TO DO THAT, BUT I DO WANT TO KNOW IF THIS WAS GIVEN TO YOU. DO YOU BELIEVE YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO DELIVER BETTER SERVICE TO THE RESIDENTS OF CITY OF DALLAS? ANYTHING THAT THE THIS THIS GROUP HAS AS COUNCIL DECIDED TO PROVIDE TO DAS, WE WOULD CONTINUE TO USE IT TO ENHANCE THE SERVICES THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY PROVIDING. CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO ME THE NUMBER ONE REASON WHY WE HAVE TO EUTHANIZE ANIMALS. I KNOW WE TRY OUR HARDEST NOT TO. WELL, DIAZ TAKES IN ABOUT 28,000 ANIMALS A YEAR. THAT'S A LITTLE OVER 4000 MORE THAN THE PREVIOUS YEAR. HOWEVER, WE ARE REQUIRED BY LAW TO HOLD ANIMALS FOR CERTAIN TIME FRAMES. THEY COULD RANGE FROM THREE DAYS TO FIVE DAYS TO TEN DAYS TO, IF IT'S A SUSPECTED ANIMAL CRUELTY VICTIM, COULD BE THERE OVER 30 DAYS. WITH OUR SPACING AND FOR WHAT WE TAKE IN ON AN ANNUAL BASIS, SOME DECISIONS HAVE TO BE MADE FOR SPACE, UNFORTUNATELY. BUT THIS IS NOT A A CITY OF DALLAS ISSUE. THIS IS A NATIONAL ISSUE. SURE. YEAH, IT'S A CITY OF DALLAS ISSUE. IF WE DON'T DO ANYTHING TO CHANGE IT IN OUR JURISDICTION. AND WHEN WHEN YOU SPEAK TO THE, THE THE CONTRACTED VET SERVICES SPECIFICALLY. SO WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE CAPACITY. Y'ALL ARE BUSTING AT THE SEAMS. IT'S IT'S OFTEN LEADING TO AN INCREASE IN NUMBER OF EUTHANIZATIONS THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE WITHIN OUR ORGANIZATION. WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT NUMBER DROP, BUT WE HAVEN'T GIVEN YOU ANY MORE SPACE TO TAKE IN THE ANIMALS WHEN THERE'S CLEAR DEMAND. VET POSITIONS. DO WE HAVE THOSE 24 HOURS A DAY OR DO YOU HAVE A NEED, A GAP THAT HAS NOT BEEN FILLED FOR CERTAIN HOURS? WE CURRENTLY HAVE VET SERVICES DURING OPERATIONAL HOURS. WE HAVE VETS THAT ARE THERE IN THE BUILDING. OUR SURGERY VETS ARE THERE FROM ANYWHERE FROM 6 TO 7 IN THE MORNING TILL MID AFTERNOON. [02:45:07] 4 OR 5. AND THEN WE HAVE ANOTHER GROUP OF INDIVIDUALS WHO DO OUR INTAKE EVALUATIONS. EVERY ANIMAL THAT COMES INTO THE SHELTER HAS TO HAVE AN INTAKE EVALUATION TO ENSURE THAT THEY'RE PROVIDED THE PROPER VACCINATIONS, OBSERVATIONS AND SO FORTH. SO WE CURRENTLY HAVE TWO FULL TIME VETS AND ABOUT FOUR PART TIME VETS, BUT WE CURRENTLY HAVE TWO VACANCIES IN OUR PART TIME BEDS. AND WITH THIS PROPOSED CONTRACTED VET SERVICE THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR YOU TO FILL IN THE GAPS WHEN YOU DON'T HAVE OR HOW WOULD YOU UTILIZE IF THIS IF IT WAS DECIDED TO ENHANCE THAT THROUGH THIS SERVICE, WHAT WE WOULD DO IS USE THOSE CONTRACT VETS TO FILL IN THE GAPS DURING HOLIDAYS, OFF TIMES OR VACANCIES. OKAY, THANK YOU FOR THE ANSWERS. I JUST HOPE THAT WE CAN LOOK AT REALLY A MORE PRODUCTIVE WAY THAT WE COULD DELIVER FOR OUR RESIDENTS. IF NOT, WE WILL BE IN THE SAME BOAT STILL OVER CAPACITY AND HAVING THE SAME CONVERSATION NEXT FISCAL YEAR BUDGET CYCLE. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. GO AHEAD, MR. MAYOR. I JUST WANTED TO JUMP IN. I WANTED TO THANK COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA FOR YOUR COMMENTS. AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE ROBUSTNESS OF THIS CONVERSATION AROUND OUR WHOLE ANIMAL SERVICES PROGRAM, WE UNDERSTAND AND EVEN GOING THROUGH THIS BUDGET PROCESS, THE CHALLENGES THAT WE'RE ADDRESSING AT THIS FACILITY, IT'S A VERY OUTDATED AND OLD FACILITY. I THINK GOING FORWARD, AS WE COME BACK AND TALK ABOUT WAYS TO ENHANCE THAT SERVICE DELIVERY OVERALL, WE UNDERSTAND THAT WE'RE PROBABLY NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO GENERAL FUND OUR WAY OUT OF THIS PROBLEM. I THINK GOING FORWARD, AS WE BEGIN TO REIMAGINE AND THINK ABOUT OUR BOND PROGRAMS, JUST ON THE PRIORITIES THAT WE HAVE AROUND STREET IMPROVEMENTS AND BEING ABLE TO TAKE CARE OF THE ISSUES AND THE CONCERNS AT THE ANIMAL SHELTER. I THINK WE'RE GOING TO BE ASKING FOR THIS BODY TO SUPPORT MAYBE A FUTURE BOND PROGRAM THAT WILL DEDICATE FUNDS TO BE ABLE TO HELP US CATCH UP. WE ARE DEFINITELY DOING THE WORK EVERY SINGLE DAY TO TRY TO BRING PARTNERSHIPS TO THE TABLE. I WANT TO APPLAUD THIS TEAM FOR THE WORK THAT THEY CONTINUE TO DO AT THE SHELTER, BUT IT ACTUALLY IS GOING TO TAKE SOME MORE INTENTIONAL DECISIONS AROUND HOW DO WE CONTINUE TO AFFORD A PROGRAM THAT WE KNOW IS TRULY A PART OF OUR PUBLIC SAFETY ECOSYSTEM AND HOW WE TAKE CARE OF THE OVERPOPULATION? WE TALKED ABOUT THE VETERINARIAN. VETERINARIAN SERVICES. BUT THIS IS A CONVERSATION THAT I THINK HAS TO CONTINUE EVEN BEYOND THIS BUDGET, ABOUT WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO AS IT RELATES TO THE CONDITION CURRENTLY OF OUR ANIMAL SHELTER FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS. THANK YOU SO MUCH. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE IN YOUR PACKET FROM TODAY? CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE. THANK YOU. I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS ITEM BECAUSE ONCE AGAIN, IT'S A TAX RATE INCREASE OVER THE CITY MANAGER'S PROPOSED RATE. IN 2019. WHEN I WAS FIRST ELECTED EDITOR, JAMESON WAS THE DIRECTOR. AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HE DID THAT I THINK WAS SO SIGNIFICANT FOR OUR CITY WAS HE DEVELOPED THESE INCREDIBLE PARTNERSHIPS WITH THE RESCUE GROUPS AND REALLY INNOVATIVE WAYS OF GETTING ANIMALS ADOPTED AND OUT INTO FOSTER GROUPS. YOU HAVE TAKEN IT AGAIN TO ANOTHER NEW LEVEL. AND THE IMPROVEMENT THAT WE'VE SEEN IN DALLAS ANIMAL SERVICE OVER THE SIX YEARS I'VE SERVED IS TRULY REMARKABLE. I THINK ABOUT IT ALL THE TIME BECAUSE I HAVE TWO DOGS FROM DALLAS ANIMAL SERVICES. AND THEY'RE NOT THE KIND I'VE ONLY EVER HAD ONE DOG BEFORE. AND NOW I'VE GOT THESE TWO BIG DOGS THAT I MIGHT NOT HAVE PICKED, BUT FOR COMING TO THE SHELTER. THE PROBLEM THAT I SEE IS MATH IS THAT WHEN I LOOK AT THE STATISTICS THAT YOU PROVIDE ABOUT HOW MANY ANIMALS ARE COMING IN VERSUS HOW MANY YOU'RE ABLE TO PARTNER OUT, HOW MANY ARE ADOPTED OUT, HOW MANY ARE REUNIFIED WITH FAMILIES. YOU ARE GETTING MORE ANIMALS EVERY SINGLE WEEK. ALMOST CLEAR. THE SHELTER'S VERY GOOD. BUT WE CAN'T BECOME A WAREHOUSE. AND SO, AS I'VE TALKED TO RESIDENTS ABOUT THIS AND THEY SAY, WELL, YOU JUST NEED ANOTHER SHELTER. OKAY, WELL, IF WE HAD ANOTHER SHELTER, WE'RE GOING TO FILL UP ANOTHER 100 KENNELS IN ONE MONTH. SO THEN WHAT? THE NEXT MONTH DO WE BUILD A THIRD SHELTER AND WE'LL FILL THAT UP IN A MONTH. AND AT WHAT POINT ARE WE JUST WAREHOUSING ANIMALS? AND SO I THINK THE WORK YOU'RE DOING WITH SPAYING AND NEUTERING AND TRYING TO PROMOTE RESPONSIBLE OWNERSHIP IS REALLY, REALLY SIGNIFICANT. BUT LET ME ASK YOU YOU SAY DALLAS 90 AND I THINK YOU DO THE 90 LIVE LEASE RATE BECAUSE THAT MAKES YOU A NO KILL SHELTER. IS THAT RIGHT? YES. AND WHAT PERCENTAGE ARE YOU NOW? HOW CLOSE ARE YOU TO THAT CURRENTLY? DIAZ FOR DOGS IS AT 87% LIVE RELEASE RATE. OKAY. AND I WANT TO APPLAUD OUR PARTNERS BECAUSE THEY HAVE STEPPED FORWARD AND DONE A LOT. WE HAVE REPORTED BACK TO YOUR ANIMAL ADVISORY COMMISSION MEMBERS ON OUR SUCCESSES THAT THIS BUDGET HAS PROVIDED OVER THE YEARS IN BUILDING THOSE [02:50:10] PARTNERSHIPS THROUGH SPAY AND NEUTER EFFORTS, THROUGH OUTSIDE GRANTS, THROUGH PARTNER ORGANIZATIONS. WE HAVE ORGANIZATIONS THAT COME TO OUR FACILITY AND DO SPAY AND NEUTER EFFORTS ON THE PROPERTY. SO WE DO A LOT. WE DO A LOT OF PARTNERSHIPS AND A LOT OF REACHING OUT TO THE COMMUNITY TO PROVIDE THESE SERVICES IN THESE DESERT AREAS WHERE THEY DO NOT HAVE ACCESS TO VET CARE. BUT IT'S GREATLY APPRECIATED ALL THE EFFORTS AND ALL THE PARTNERSHIPS THAT WE HAVE BUILT AND WE CONTINUE TO BUILD ON WHAT DIRECTOR JAMESON AND DIRECTOR WEBER HAVE BUILT ON PRIOR TO MY ARRIVAL. WELL, EXCELLENT. AND I WILL SAY THAT, LIKE, AS COUNCIL MEMBERS, WE NEED TO BE HELPING YOU GET THE WORD TO OUR RESIDENTS ABOUT THE AVAILABILITY OF PETS. AND HOW THEY CAN YOU KNOW, ENJOY THEIR LIFE A LITTLE BIT BETTER WITH, WITH DOG HAIR ALL OVER THEIR CLOTHES. SO IN ADDITION TO EUTHANIZATION BECAUSE OF SPACE, I MEAN, ARE YOU NOT ALSO EUTHANIZING BECAUSE OF TRAGIC INJURY, HEALTH AND BEHAVIOR ISSUES? YES. DO YOU HAVE ANY KIND OF BREAKDOWN ON THAT? DON'T HAVE IT WITH ME, BUT I COULD PROBABLY PROVIDE IT TO YOU. OKAY. WELL, I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT. WE RECENTLY, I THINK IT WAS LAST WEDNESDAY, HAD A BIG PACKET FROM A RESIDENT OF ALL THE ANIMALS THAT YOU HAD EUTHANIZED, AND THERE WERE HUNDREDS OF CHICKENS. I THINK THERE WERE LIKE SIX HORSES. SURPRISINGLY, A TURTLE. I THINK WE WERE NOTING THAT. CAN YOU SPEAK AT ALL TO WHY YOU WOULD HAVE EUTHANIZED SO MANY DIFFERENT CHICKENS? AND THERE ARE ROOSTERS IN THERE AS WELL. UNFORTUNATELY, THOSE ARE PART OF THE VICTIMS OF SUSPECTED ANIMAL CRUELTY. AND THEY'RE PART OF A COCKFIGHTING RING AND PART OF AN INVESTIGATION. THOSE ANIMALS CANNOT BE FOSTERED OUT OR ADOPTED. UNFORTUNATELY, THE DECISION HAS TO BE MADE TO EUTHANIZE THOSE ANIMALS. AND SO WOULD EACH CHICKEN COUNT TOWARDS YOUR LIVE RELEASE RATE? THEY COUNT TOWARDS OTHER NOT TOWARDS THE THE LARGEST POPULATION IN THE SHELTER, WHICH IS DOGS. OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY, WELL, I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR, ESPECIALLY FROM THE QUALITY OF LIFE COMMITTEE, ON THINGS WE CAN DO TO HELP SUPPORT YOU, BUT NOT TO RAISE THE TAX RATE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MR. BLAIR RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE. WHILE I AM MUCH LIKE CHAIR MENDELSOHN DOG LOVER, I HAVE ONE THAT I GOT OUT OF DAS. SHE'S A BRAT, AND I HAVE ONE THAT I ADOPTED. SHE'S A BIGGER BRAT. I DON'T I NEED TO ASK YOU A QUESTION JUST FOR THE SAKE THAT THE REST OF MY COLLEAGUES HERE. DO YOU KNOW, WHAT IS THE DISTRICT THAT HAS THE MOST DOGS IN THE CITY? I DON'T HAVE THAT CALCULATION READILY AVAILABLE. BUT I'M PRETTY SURE WE CAN GATHER IT. AND IT. IF IF I WOULD MAKE IT CLEAR IF AN ANIMAL IS ANIMAL'S IDENTIFIED AS BEING ABANDONED IN AN AREA. IF IT'S IN CURRENT PROGRESS, REPORT IT TO 911 SO WE CAN GET CRUELTY INVOLVED. IF NOT, IT'S AFTER THE FACT. IT'S 311. DS WILL INVESTIGATE AND PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION TO DPD. BECAUSE THAT IS A CRIMINAL OFFENSE FOR ABANDONMENT. SO DO THESE DOGS IF THEY'RE HEALTHY ENOUGH AND AND FOUND EARLY ENOUGH END UP IN DAS CARE. SOME MAY COME IN AS STRAYS BECAUSE SOMETIMES WE DON'T KNOW THE, THE ACTUAL ACTIVITY THAT CREATED THE ANIMAL TO BE IN THE AREA AS A STRAY. THEY'LL COME INTO THE FACILITY, THEY'LL GET TAKEN CARE OF. BUT AS I SAID EARLIER, EVERY ANIMAL THAT COMES IN THE SHELTER GETS AN OBSERVATION AND A MEDICAL REVIEW. AND IF THAT TEAM DETERMINES THIS ANIMAL HAS A MICROCHIP AND SOME TYPE OF IDENTIFIER, AND WE CAN LOOK AT THE ANIMAL BASED ON BODY SCORE, CONDITION, HEALTH OR ANY OTHER ISSUE. WE WILL REACH OUT TO THE TO THE DETECTIVES IN THE CRUELTY DIVISION TO MAKE A REFERRAL. SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT BASED ON HOW IT IS, IT IS IDENTIFIED? IT DEPENDS UPON HOW THE ANIMAL IS TREATED. AND WELL. AND BROUGHT INTO THE THE YOUR NETWORK. CORRECT? YES. IN ORDER FOR US TO TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION, WE'D HAVE TO HAVE AN OFFENDER. BUT WE DO FROM TIME TO TIME, REACH OUT TO CRUELTY DETECTIVES TO SEE IF THEY MAY HAVE ANY INFORMATION OR ANYTHING THAT WE COULD UTILIZE TO FURTHER THEIR CAUSE IN INVESTIGATION. SO CAN I ASK A CITY MANAGER QUESTION, PLEASE? YOU SAID THAT YOU THAT YOU GUYS WERE LOOKING AT WAYS TO BETTER SERVE THIS THIS THE NEEDS OF ANIMAL, [02:55:05] ANIMAL SERVICES THROUGH BOND PACKAGES AND FUTURE, I SHOULD SAY FUTURE BOND PACKAGES AND DIFFERENT ALLOCATIONS. IS THAT CORRECT? YES, I DID SAY THAT. AND IT'S IT'S PRIMARILY BECAUSE OF THE CURRENT CONDITION OF THE FACILITY. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE OUT THERE, BUT WHAT I CAN TELL YOU IS THAT I'VE BEEN THERE, AND MANY OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS AROUND THIS HORSESHOE HAVE BEEN THERE. WE HAVE DONE AN INCREDIBLE JOB AT KEEPING THAT FACILITY UP TO THE STANDARDS INSPECTIONS. WE HAD SOME THINGS THAT WE HAD TO WORK THROUGH IN THIS CURRENT YEAR BUDGET, AND WE WILL CONTINUE THAT, BUT IT'S DEFINITELY SOMETHING THAT WE CANNOT IGNORE. JUST WHETHER IT'S FOR SHORT TERM CARE, WE STILL NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE FACILITY ITSELF WOULD PROVIDE THE LEVEL OF, OF EXCELLENCE THAT WE WANT TO DEMONSTRATE ACROSS THE CITY. SO I JUST I SHARED THAT BECAUSE I DO BELIEVE THAT GOING FORWARD, THAT WILL BE SOMETHING THAT STAFF WILL BE ABLE TO COME BACK, WORK THROUGH THE COMMITTEE AND TALK ABOUT WAYS THAT WE CAN CREATE SOME ADDITIONAL INVESTMENT THAT I KNOW IS NEEDED WITH THE CURRENT ANIMAL. AND I'M TALKING ABOUT THE SHELTER IN PARTICULAR. SO JUST TO FURTHER TO FURTHER DIG DOWN INTO THAT, YOU'RE SAYING THAT THERE MAY BE SOME NEEDS WITHIN THE CURRENT FACILITY THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED IN ORDER TO, TO CONTINUE TO WORK AT A HIGH LEVEL OF STANDARD? BEFORE WE GO INTO BROADENING WHAT SERVICES WE'RE ABLE TO PROVIDE IN A MORE OF A FUTURISTIC VIEW, I THINK THERE'S A BALANCING ACT AS WE KNOW THAT WE DON'T HAVE UNLIMITED BUDGETS. WE ARE STILL WORKING WITHIN THE CONSTRAINTS OF HOW WE HAVE TO BALANCE AND BE ABLE TO ADDRESS ALL OF THE SERVICES ACROSS THE CITY, WHICH IS WHAT WE'VE DELIVERED IN THE CURRENT BUDGET. HOWEVER, I BROUGHT UP THE FACT ABOUT THE ONGOING NEEDS AND, YOU KNOW, THE PARTNERSHIP PIECE. I DO WANT TO COMMEND COUNCILWOMAN MENDELSOHN FOR POINTING THAT OUT. WE'VE CONTINUED WITH A LOT OF THOSE PARTNERSHIPS. THIS TEAM IS ACTUALLY WORKING TO EVEN ENHANCE THOSE PARTNERSHIPS AND CREATE ADDITIONAL ONES THAT WILL HELP US DEAL WITH THE OVERCROWDING. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE FOSTER CARE PROGRAM, WHICH IS REALLY GREAT, BUT OFTENTIMES IF WE'RE SENDING OUR, OUR WONDERFUL, FRIENDLY COMPANIONS OUT WITH THOSE FOSTER FAMILIES, IF THEY DON'T HAVE THE, THE MEANS TO BE ABLE TO SUPPORT AND PROVIDE THE MEDICAL ITEMS THAT THOSE FRIENDS NEED, THEN WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ASKING THEM TO SUPPORT US, DO THE ADOPTIONS. BUT AT THE SAME TIME, IF THEY DON'T HAVE THOSE MEANS, THEN OFTENTIMES WE DON'T HAVE A WAY TO MAKE UP THOSE GAPS. SO I THINK OVERALL, THIS IS AN ISSUE THAT I'M GLAD IT'S BEEN POINTED OUT, BECAUSE I DO THINK IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE'VE GOT TO THINK THROUGH GOING FORWARD. HOW DO WE LOOK AT THE CURRENT NEEDS AND THE FUTURE NEEDS, BALANCE THE SERVICES THAT WE'RE PROVIDING RIGHT NOW AND BE ABLE TO DO THAT WITHIN THE EXISTING FACILITY THAT WE HAVE, AND THAT'S THE WORK THAT THIS TEAM HAS CONTINUED TO DO OVER THESE LAST FEW YEARS. DO YOU DO YOU HAVE A TIME LIMIT? DO YOU THINK IT'LL BE A YEAR, TWO YEARS, FIVE YEARS, TWO MONTHS WORTH OF EXPLORATION BEFORE YOU CAN COME BACK TO THIS BODY AND SAY, THIS IS WHAT WE NEED IN OUR ANIMAL SERVICES. THESE ARE OUR NEW PARTNERS. THESE HOW? WE'VE ENHANCED OUR PARTNERSHIPS IN ORDER TO TO SATISFY WHAT IS NEEDED. LET ME ANSWER IT THIS WAY. AS PART OF THE THE THE PROCESS OF LOOKING AT THE BUDGET. THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT WE'RE ASKING OUR TEAMS TO DO, NOT JUST WITH THIS DEPARTMENT, BUT ALL OF OUR DEPARTMENTS, BECAUSE WE UNDERSTAND THAT COSTS ARE GOING UP ON CERTAIN SERVICES. AND SO WHEN I TALK ABOUT THE WORD REIMAGINING, IT'S REALLY TRUE BECAUSE THIS IS THIS IS SOMETHING WE HAVE TO DO. NOT ONCE A YEAR. IT'S THROUGHOUT THE YEAR. WE'RE LOOKING FOR WAYS TO IMPROVE OUR SERVICE DELIVERY MODELS. WE'RE LOOKING AT WAYS TO BE MORE INNOVATIVE, AT THE SAME TIME, BEING MORE EFFICIENT AND BEING ABLE TO DO THOSE COLLABORATIVE PARTNERSHIPS THAT CAN ALLOW FOR US TO USE THE DOLLARS THAT WE HAVE AND BE ABLE TO LEVERAGE THOSE TO GET ADDITIONAL SUPPORT. SO I WOULDN'T NECESSARILY PUT A TIME FRAME AS IF WE'RE GOING TO DO IT OUTSIDE OF THE PROCESS FOR THE BUDGET, BUT IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE'RE DOING DAILY. WE'RE CURRENTLY CONTINUOUSLY ASSESSING OUR NEEDS ACROSS THE ORGANIZATION. THIS BUDGET ALLOWS FOR US TO TALK ABOUT WHAT'S THE MOST CRITICAL. I THINK THE TEAM MENTIONED HOW WE SAW AN INCREASE IN ANIMAL CRUELTY CASES THIS PAST YEAR. AND SO WE APPROACHED THAT FIRST, HOW DO WE MAKE SURE THAT WE'VE GOT THE FUNDING IN PLACE TO BE ABLE TO DO THOSE INVESTIGATIONS? WE THINK THAT'S CRITICAL AND MAKING SURE THAT WE'VE ADDRESSED THAT IN THE BUDGET. AND SO OVERALL, I THINK THAT WHAT YOU SHOULD EXPECT IS, AS WE GO INTO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS BUDGET, [03:00:05] THAT THAT WORK WILL CONTINUE. SO IT'S NOT A ONE TIME THING. IT'S NOT A POINT IN TIME. IT'S GOING TO BE A CONTINUATION OF THE WAYS THAT WE'RE LOOKING TO CONTINUE TO DELIVER ENHANCED SERVICES IN THIS DEPARTMENT. WELL, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ALL THAT ROBUST CONVERSATION FROM BOTH OF YOU. I DO HAVE ALTHOUGH I AM I LOVE MY MY FUR BABIES AND THE ONE THAT I GOT FROM ANIMAL FROM DAS. SHE HAS A LIFELONG ILLNESS THAT HAS COST ME THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS. I PAY MORE FOR HER MEDICAL CARE THAN I PAY FOR MY OWN OUT OF POCKET. I'M SERIOUS. AND THAT'S HOW MUCH I LOVE HER. I CANNOT FOR FOR WHAT YOU HAVE EXPLAINED, I WOULD REALLY INCREASE OR WELL VOTE TO INCREASE IT. IF IT WERE NOT FOR THE CONVERSATION YOU JUST GAVE ME WITH WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH ON A LONG TERM BASIS, OPPOSED TO DOING SOMETHING THAT IS RIGHT NOW YOU'RE LOOKING FOR A PATHWAY FOR FOREVER AS TO HOW WE MANAGE TO OUR ANIMAL SERVICES. AND I TRULY DO APPRECIATE LIKE I SAID, MY FIRST FUR BABY STORMI, IS MY LOVE, AND SHE'S MY SICK BABY. SO AND AND GOLDIE IS MY BAD BABY, BUT THEY'RE BOTH MINE, AND I WOULD DO ANYTHING I CAN TO HELP SUPPORT THEM. BUT I WANT YOU TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO WORK WITH THE THE CITY MANAGER TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE TAKE CARE OF SOMEBODY ELSE'S NEW FUR BABIES. LIKE I CAN TAKE CARE OF MY OWN. THANK YOU. MR. ROTH, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE. THANK YOU. I WANT TO APPLAUD CITY MANAGER FOR RECOGNIZING THE IMPORTANCE OF THIS ISSUE. IT'S COME TO US THROUGH THE PUBLIC, AND IT IS IMPORTANT THAT WE ADDRESS IT. IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU ALL HAVE A PLAN. IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'VE CREATED A BUDGET TO PROVIDE FOR IMMEDIATE NEEDS, FOR FUTURE OPPORTUNITIES, TO ADDRESS THE CONCERNS OF THE PUBLIC, AND ALSO TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAVE A SUSTAINABLE AND LONG TERM METHOD AND PROGRESS AND PROGRAM TO HANDLE THIS. IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT I THINK YOU YOU'RE ATTENTIVE TO IT, THAT IT'S IT'S IN YOUR BUDGET, I WOULD NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS. I WOULD BECAUSE OF I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO HAVE AN INCREASE ABOVE THE CITY MANAGER'S REQUESTED TAX RATE THAT YOU'RE SUGGESTING. THANK YOU. MR. BAZALDUA, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I DO WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE, JUST LIKE I DID WITH THE LAST ONE, I THINK THAT THERE'S BEEN SOME QUESTIONS AND SOME I THINK, MISUNDERSTANDING OF HOW I CAME UP WITH THIS. I DID SIT DOWN WITH CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE, WHO SPOKE DIRECTLY WITH PAUL AND HIS TEAM. AND THIS IS ACTUALLY A PART OF THE CITY MANAGER'S PLAN. TO YOUR POINT, MRS. BLAIR. THIS THIS WAS NOT THROWING DARTS. AND SO I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE ADEQUATELY FUNDING TO ADDRESS WHAT I'VE HEARD FROM CONSTITUENTS QUITE OFTEN ON A DAY TO DAY BASIS, QUITE FRANKLY. AND I WILL SAY THERE'S AN AMENDMENT IN HERE THAT I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO AVOID. I DON'T KNOW THAT I HAVE TO DO THE MATH. SO I THINK THAT IT'S OKAY. I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND MY MOTION TO REMOVE THE ONE ITEM OF 500,000 FOR THE SPAY AND NEUTER SERVICES. SO IT WOULD MAKE THE SOURCE OF FUNDS 2 MILLION INSTEAD OF 2.5, AND THE USE OF FUNDS WOULD BE ALL SIX POINTS STRIKING OUT THE FIRST. SO IT WOULD BE A TOTAL OF $2 MILLION. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND? IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. SO WE ARE NOW ON AN AMENDMENT BY MR. BAZALDUA TO AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE. THAT TAKES THE AMOUNT FROM 2.5 DOWN TO 2 MILLION, AND IT STRIKES THE FIRST 500,000 FROM THAT LIST OF SIX ON THE USE OF FUNDS. IS THAT CORRECT? YES. OKAY. SO IT'S TWO THROUGH SIX ON YOUR USE OF FUNDS FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT OF 2 MILLION. OTHERWISE IT'S AS IT'S AS WRITTEN. RIGHT. OKAY. YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES TO EXPLAIN YOUR AMENDMENT. THANK YOU. [03:05:01] MAYOR. YOUR AMENDMENT TO YOUR AMENDMENT. YES. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I THINK THAT THE THE STRONGEST POINT OF CONTENTION AT THIS POINT IS THE SOURCE OF FUNDS. I DON'T THINK THAT THERE'S A DISPUTE ON THE NEED FOR WHAT THE USE OF FUNDS IS. CITY MANAGER, DO YOU MIND LETTING ME KNOW WHERE WE ARE WITH UNUSED ARPA FUNDS? I CAN GO THROUGH AND TELL YOU WHERE THERE ARE OPPORTUNITIES. I THINK WHEN WE LOOK AT IF THIS IS THE BODY'S WILL TO FIND ADDITIONAL FUNDING THE MAJORITY OF THE ARPA FUNDS, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, ABOUT 7.8 MILLION RIGHT NOW THAT'S UNENCUMBERED IS ACTUALLY SITTING IN ONE LINE ITEM UNDER THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL OFFICE. THOSE ARE THE THE THE DISTRICT. I BELIEVE SPECIFIC PROJECTS THAT WERE IDENTIFIED BY COUNCIL MEMBERS, EITHER FORMER OR CURRENT. AND SO THAT WILL BE IN MY LOOKING AT THE CURRENT LISTING, THAT WILL BE WHERE THE LARGEST LINE ITEM THAT FUNDING IS REMAINING. THERE'S ALSO A LINE ITEM THAT ADDRESSES THE PUBLIC SAFETY HIRING AND RETENTION, WHICH IS ABOUT 7.7. WE ACTUALLY IDENTIFIED THAT FUNDING EARLIER IN THE YEAR WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THE HIRING OF ADDITIONAL OFFICERS. SO I WOULD NOT SUGGEST TO PULL ANYTHING AWAY FROM THAT LINE ITEM, BECAUSE WE'VE USED THAT AS A PART OF BALANCING THE BUDGET. THERE WAS ALSO A LINE ITEM OF ABOUT $15 MILLION IN ARPA THAT'S STILL SHOWING AS UNENCUMBERED, BUT THAT IS DUE TO MAJOR MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES OF A LOT OF OUR PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITIES, ROOF REPLACEMENTS THAT ARE BEING PLANNED AND WORKED ON BY FACILITIES AND OUR REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT. AND THEN THERE'S ABOUT ANOTHER 2.8 STILL UNENCUMBERED FOR DEFERRED MAINTENANCE. AND THAT'S FOR FACILITIES THROUGHOUT THE CITY. SO IF THE QUESTION IS WHERE WOULD THERE BE A REMAINING BUCKET OUTSIDE OF WHAT'S BEEN PRESENTED IN THE BUDGET AND WHAT MIGHT BE ALREADY INCLUDED IN SOME OF THE AMENDMENTS BEFORE YOU, THE 7.8 MILLION, AGAIN, THAT IS BASED ON INDIVIDUAL COUNCIL MEMBERS, DISTRICTS AND PROJECTS THAT EITHER HAVE NOT MOVED FORWARD OR MIGHT BE IN THE PROCESS OF BEING REIMAGINED BY COUNCIL MEMBERS, BUT THAT WOULD BE A LINE ITEM FOR YOUR DISCUSSION. CAN YOU EXPLAIN THE LINE ITEM OF THE CITY HALL? GENERATION AND ELECTRICAL THAT HAS AN OUTSTANDING $6.6 MILLION THAT IS UNENCUMBERED? MAYOR, YES. FOR WHAT PURPOSE? I DO NOT BELIEVE THIS IS GERMANE ANYMORE. THIS IS RECONSTRUCTING AN AMENDMENT THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE ALREADY BEEN SUBMITTED AND COULD BE RESUBMITTED ON THE 17TH OF SEPTEMBER, BUT WE'RE NOW DOING WORK THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN ALREADY BROUGHT TO THIS ROOM AND TO START QUESTIONING ARPA FUNDING TO THEN CHANGE A SOURCE OF FUNDS ON ON AT THIS MEETING SEEMS INAPPROPRIATE AND A POOR USE OF OUR TIME. I'M GOING TO LET HIM WORK THROUGH THE AMENDMENT A LITTLE BIT, SINCE THAT'S KIND OF WHAT WE'RE I MEAN, IT'S KIND OF WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE. BUT I GET YOUR POINT. BUT WE'RE HERE, SO THANK YOU, MAYOR. I AMENDED MY ORIGINAL MOTION SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE OF THE USE OF FUNDS, AND THAT'S WHAT I'M ACTUALLY REFERENCING. NOW, JUST TO SEE IF THERE IS POTENTIALLY THE WILL. BECAUSE I HATE TO GO PAST AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO ENHANCE SERVICES FOR OUR RESIDENTS. JUST BECAUSE OF SEMANTICS. CITY MANAGER, CAN YOU ANSWER THE QUESTION THAT WE WERE INTERRUPTED ON? PLEASE? CAN YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION, PLEASE, SIR? YES, MA'AM. THERE'S A LINE ITEM OF $6.6 MILLION TOTAL UNENCUMBERED. AND IT IS UNIT NAME, CITY HALL, GENERATION AND ELECTRICAL. YES. THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. I'M SORRY. I HAD THREE THOUGHTS AFTER THAT ONE, AND I COULDN'T REMEMBER THE QUESTION. SO AS YOU ALL RECALL CITY HALL WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE 2024 BOND PROGRAM. AND THERE WAS A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS THAT WE'VE HAD OVER THESE LAST FEW MONTHS ABOUT ONGOING FACILITY MAINTENANCE NEEDS. AND THE ELECTRICAL PIECE HAS BEEN SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE BEEN WORKING THROUGH. WE TALKED ABOUT IN OUR JUNE BRIEFING OF THIS YEAR ABOUT THE WAYS THAT WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH A LOT OF THE DEFERRED MAINTENANCE NEEDS. THERE'S NO SURPRISE TO ANYONE AROUND THIS HORSESHOE THAT WE CONTINUE TO HAVE CONCERNS AROUND OVERALL HVAC ISSUES WITHIN THIS BUILDING, AND WE HAVE BEGUN THE WORK TO LOOK AT OUR OVERALL WORK PLAN FOR FY 26, BECAUSE WE ALSO HAVE THE OTHER FACILITIES THAT I TALKED ABOUT, OUR PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITIES THAT WERE MOVING FORWARD. SO THIS IS JUST THE BALANCE BASED ON THE PRIORITIZATION OF THE WAY WE'RE MOVING THAT WORK FORWARD. [03:10:03] AND WHEN DO THESE FUNDS NEED TO BE USED BY. SORRY, I DON'T HAVE THAT LEVEL OF DETAIL. I WOULD HAVE TO WORK WITH MY FACILITIES AND REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT TEAM TO BE ABLE TO GET YOU TO THAT DETAIL AT THIS TIME. JACK, CAN YOU SPEAK TO THE DATE THAT WE WOULD NEED TO USE ANY ARPA FUNDS BY THE ORIGINAL GOAL, THE ORIGINAL REQUIREMENTS, WAS DECEMBER OF 2026, DECEMBER 31ST, 2026. OH, I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T. SO YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT WHEN TO SPEND THE ARPA DOLLARS? YES, MA'AM. OKAY, I'M SORRY, BUT WE GOT BOTH THE ANSWERS, SO THANK YOU FOR THAT. OKAY. WELL, I'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM COLLEAGUES. RIGHT. RIGHT NOW I'VE PULLED IT. I MEAN, I'VE AMENDED THE MOTION SPECIFICALLY TO TAKE OUT A LINE ITEM THAT WAS DUPLICATIVE WITH ANOTHER AMENDMENT ON THE NEXT PAGE, AMENDMENT SIX. AND THAT SOURCE OF FUNDS IS SOMETHING THAT I PLAN TO SUPPORT BECAUSE OF THE USE IS ALREADY SOMETHING THAT I SUPPORTED. IT SOUNDS FROM HEARING MY COLLEAGUES DISCUSSION THAT IT'S NOT A MATTER OF SUPPORTING THE USE OF THESE FUNDS, BUT INSTEAD THE SOURCE. SO I'D LIKE TO HEAR IF ANY COLLEAGUES ARE WILLING TO CHIME IN AND SEE IF THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE COULD CHANGE THE SOURCE OF FUNDS FROM ON POTENTIAL ARPA FUNDS IF THERE WOULD BE THE WILL TO GET THIS DONE. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON MR. BAZALDUA AMENDMENT TO HIS AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE. MAYOR. I BELIEVE I WAS ACTUALLY BELOW MAYOR PRO TEM, AND I KNOW IT SHOWED FOR A MOMENT THAT I WAS ABOVE, BUT IT DOES SHOW HIM BELOW AGAIN. MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU MAYOR. I STILL WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THE AMENDMENT. I DO WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE USE OF FUNDS. DIRECTOR RAMON, CAN YOU TELL ME EARLIER YOU MENTIONED THAT YOU HAD TWO VACANCIES. CAN YOU TALK TO ME ABOUT THE NATIONWIDE SHORTAGE OF VETERINARIANS AND TECHS AND HOW LONG IT TAKES TO HIRE SOMEONE ON. I'M LOOKING ABOUT A 15 MONTH PERIOD FOR MUNICIPALITIES TO HIRE THIS TYPE OF SOMEONE IN THIS FIELD? YES. THERE'S A NATIONWIDE SHORTAGE OF VETERINARIANS FOR THIS TYPE OF SERVICE BECAUSE WE ARE HIGH VOLUME. HIGH IMPACT. THE LAST TIME WE HAD A VACANCY, IT TOOK A NUMBER OF TRIES TO ACTUALLY GET SOMEONE HIRED, AND WE ACTUALLY DID. SO BUT WE ARE SEEING SOME, SOME APPLICANTS THAT ARE COMING THROUGH, AND WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO INTERVIEW THOSE APPLICANTS. HOWEVER AS I SAID EARLIER, THIS THIS ISSUE IS NOT JUST A THIS IS JUST NATIONWIDE. THANK YOU. AND I ALSO JUST ALSO WANT TO THANK OUR CITY MANAGER FOR HER A BIG PICTURE APPROACH AND THINKING. AND OBVIOUSLY ANIMALS ARE ARE FOR BABIES TO A LOT OF US. AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY HAVE THE ADEQUATE CARE AND THAT WE ARE PRIORITIZING THEM. I DO HAVE CONCERNS, THOUGH, THAT THE LAG TIME TO HIRE SOMEONE AND HOW WE WOULD POTENTIALLY NOT BE ABLE TO MEET THOSE HIRING DEMANDS WITHIN THIS FISCAL YEAR. THANK YOU. MAYOR. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. JACK, YOU KNOW, THE THE WORDING OF YOUR ANSWER WAS SO IMPORTANT. AND IF PEOPLE WEREN'T LISTENING CLOSELY, THEY MIGHT NOT HAVE HEARD IT. YOUR ANSWER ABOUT WHEN THE ARPA DOLLARS MUST BE USED BY WAS ORIGINALLY THE DEADLINE WAS DECEMBER 26TH. CAN YOU SPEAK TO WHAT IT IS CURRENTLY FOR THOSE SPECIFIC DOLLARS? YES, MA'AM. SO THE ORIGINAL FEDERAL REGULATIONS FOR ARPA DOLLARS WAS DECEMBER 31ST OF 2026. WE DID SOME, IF YOU WILL REALLOCATION OF FUNDS BETWEEN FIRE SALARIES AND CREATED A SEPARATE FUND. THAT REALLY DOESN'T FALL UNDER THE ARPA REGULATIONS. HOWEVER, IT HAS BEEN OUR CONSTANT DIRECTION TO DEPARTMENTS THAT WE'RE GOING TO ABIDE BY THE SAME DEADLINE DECEMBER 31ST, 2026. THAT IS THE DEADLINE THAT THE CITY MANAGER HAS CONTINUED TO PRESS UPON DEPARTMENTS TO GET THE FUNDS SPENT BY. SO, IN FACT, THE ARPA DOLLARS WERE ACTUALLY SPENT FOR ELIGIBLE OVERTIME EXPENSES AND AND SOME REGULAR TIME. AND THESE DOLLARS WERE MOVED INTO A MULTIYEAR FUND, WHICH OUR MANAGER IS RIGHTLY TRYING TO EXPEND EXPEDITIOUSLY, BUT IS NOT REQUIRED ON ANY DEADLINE. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. AT THIS POINT, THOSE ARE LOCAL FUNDS THAT DON'T HAVE THE SAME FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS. BUT THE CITY MANAGER'S DIRECTION, AGAIN, HAS BEEN TO EXPEDITIOUSLY GET THOSE DONE ACCORDING TO THE ORIGINAL DEADLINE. AND THEN ORIGINALLY EVERY DOLLAR HAD A NAME CORRECT. THERE WAS ALL OF THE DOLLARS WERE ALLOCATED TO SPECIFIC PURPOSES. [03:15:05] IS THAT. AND SO NOW ON THE FLOOR, WITHOUT ANY ABILITY FOR SOMEONE TO HAVE RESEARCH OR ASK ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, THERE'S A USE OF ARPA FUNDS. WELL, WE HAVEN'T EVEN TALKED ABOUT WHAT THOSE FUNDS WERE ORIGINALLY INTENDED TO DO. SO THE DOLLARS BEING CONSIDERED FOR THIS LAST MINUTE CHANGE, WHAT WERE THEY INTENDED TO ADDRESS? US. ARE YOU ABLE TO ANSWER? SO AS A CITY MANAGER MENTIONED, THE 6.6 MILLION WAS REALLOCATED AFTER CITY COUNCIL MADE THE RECOMMENDATION REGARDING THE 2024 BOND PROGRAM. SO THOSE FUNDS WERE IDENTIFIED TO ADDRESS NEEDS AT CITY HALL THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE BOND PROGRAM. SO ARE YOU SAYING THAT THE DOLLARS THAT ARE PART OF THIS MOTION WOULD BE TAKEN FROM CITY HALL AND USED FOR DALLAS ANIMAL SERVICES? I BELIEVE THAT IS THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR. AND WHAT WOULD IT HAVE DONE AT CITY HALL? WHAT WHAT IS THE POINT OF THOSE DOLLARS BEING ALLOCATED TO CITY HALL? WHAT SPECIFICALLY WOULD HAVE BEEN REPAIRED? REMODELED? POINT OF ORDER, MAYOR. POINT OF ORDER. SO IS A QUESTION ABOUT. THEY'RE COMING FROM EVERYWHERE. IS A QUESTION ABOUT ARPA. I DON'T THINK THE LINE OF QUESTIONING IS REFERENCING THE MOTION THAT'S ACTUALLY ON THE FLOOR. THE SOURCE OF FUNDS NEVER CHANGED. CORRECT? CORRECT. SO THE THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR IS STILL RELATED TO PROPERTY TAXES. THE QUESTION THAT WAS ASKED WAS ACTUALLY ABOUT ARPA. SO I'M ANSWERING THE QUESTION ABOUT ARPA. SO THE MOTION IS STILL USING PROPERTY TAXES. SO WHY ARE WE EVEN TALKING ABOUT ARPA FUNDING? WELL, I MEAN, IT'S A BUDGET AMENDMENT. I'M LETTING PEOPLE EXPLAIN IN A LITTLE MORE HOLISTIC. I'M SORRY. I THOUGHT HE WAS SUBSTITUTING THE DOLLAR AMOUNTS. OH, WOW. OKAY. WELL, STILL AGAINST IT. THANK YOU. OKAY. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WANTS TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST MR. BAZALDUA AMENDMENT TO MR. ROTH? YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT. AGAIN, MAYBE I'M A LITTLE BIT CONFUSED HERE, BUT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ARPA FUNDS THAT ARE NOW ALLOCATED TO CITY HALL BUDGET ACTIVITIES IN THE FUTURE. IS THAT CORRECT? SO THE MOTION THAT'S BEING CONSIDERED RIGHT NOW IS, IS AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE, AS AMENDED, TO REDUCE IT FROM $2.5 MILLION TO $2 MILLION AND DISTRACT ITEM ONE FROM THE LIST OF USES. SO USE $2 MILLION FROM TAX RATE FOR DALLAS ANIMAL SERVICE, EXCLUDING ITEM NUMBER ONE ON THE LIST. BUT YES. THEN WE STARTED TALKING ABOUT OKAY, SO SO THE SO THE JUST TO CLARIFY FOR ME WE IT'S WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT WHETHER THE FUNDS ARE COMING FROM TAX OR FROM ARPA. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT REDUCING THE REQUESTED AMOUNT FOR THE TAX RATE REDUCTION. INCREASE TO $2 MILLION. OKAY. I'M I WOULD I'M GOING TO BE AGAINST THIS MOTION. I THINK THE THE CITY MANAGER'S BUDGET HAS BEEN ADEQUATELY REVIEWED. I THINK SHE'S GOT THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE IDENTIFIED AS A PRIORITY IN, WITHIN WITHIN HER BUDGETING PROCESS AND THAT THERE'S AND THAT THE CITY MANAGER'S BUDGET RATE TAX RATE IS SUFFICIENT. I WOULD NOT AGREE TO THE REDUCTION TO THE $2 MILLION. MR. BAZALDUA RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES ON YOUR AMENDMENT TO YOUR AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I APPRECIATE THE I JUST WANT TO ALSO SAY I APPRECIATE THE DISCUSSION. I THINK IT'S BEEN HEALTHY. I THINK IT'S ALSO CLEAR THAT THERE'S NOT THE WILL OR APPETITE FOR THIS. I HOPE THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO PRIORITIZE THIS. BUT I ALSO HOPE THAT WE CAN MAINTAIN THE SAME SPIRIT THAT WE'VE HEARD SEVERAL TIMES, AND THAT'S A OVERWHELMING SUPPORT FOR OUR CITY MANAGER'S PROPOSED BUDGET, WHICH MEANS WE'RE NOT SLASHING IT, WHICH MEANS WE'RE NOT GOING IN DEEPER THAN WHAT IT IS. AND I'VE HEARD THAT EXPRESSED FROM SEVERAL COUNCIL MEMBERS, EVEN SOME WHO HAVE SUPPORTED GOING TO A NO NEW REVENUE TAX, WHICH IS AN ABSOLUTE CONTRADICTION TO SUPPORTING THE CITY MANAGER'S PROPOSED BUDGET. SO I HOPE THAT WE WILL HAVE A PRODUCTIVE CONVERSATION AS WE MOVE FORWARD AND STAY CONSISTENT IN OUR REASONING FOR WHY WE SUPPORT OR OPPOSE THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS. BUT WITH THAT, I WILL WITHDRAW THIS AMENDMENT. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WITHDRAW THE AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT OR WITHDRAW THE UNDERLYING. I'LL WITHDRAW THIS BUDGET AMENDMENT, [03:20:05] THE UNDERLYING AMENDMENT AS WELL. IS THERE ANY OBJECTION TO WITHDRAWING THE AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT AND THE UNDERLYING AMENDMENT? HEARING NONE SO ORDERED. SO AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN. AND WITH THAT MEMBERS, I'M GOING TO READ TO YOU SOME STATUTORY LANGUAGE ABOUT EXECUTIVE SESSION, AND WE'RE GOING TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION AND HAVE LUNCH AT THE SAME TIME, AND [CLOSED SESSION] COME BACK AT 130. IT IS 12:38 P.M. ON SEPTEMBER 3RD, 2025. THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING WILL NOW GO INTO CLOSED SESSION UNDER SECTION 551 .07. ONE OF THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT ON THE FOLLOWING MATTER DESCRIBED ON TODAY'S AGENDA, ITEM NUMBER FOUR. AND WITH THAT, WE STAND AT RECESS UNTIL 130. OKAY. THE CITY COUNCIL IS MEETING HAS COMPLETED ITS CLOSED SESSION UNDER SECTION 551 .071 OF THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT. AND AT 2:12 P.M. ON SEPTEMBER 3RD, 2025, WE'VE RETURNED TO OPEN SESSION. MADAM SECRETARY, I'M GOING TO THROW IT BACK OVER TO THE CITY MANAGER. I THINK UNLESS YOU HAVE SOMETHING ELSE ON THE AGENDA. NO, MR. MAYOR, I'M AWARE. OKAY. GO AHEAD, MR. [A. 25-2556A FY 2025-26 & FY 2026-27 Budget Discussion and Amendments *For budget purposes, the City Council will be sitting as a Committee of the Whole. - Required Posting per H.B. 1522: The proposed budget is posted online at FY 2025-26 Proposed Budget and accessible directly from the city’s main page - www.dallascityhall.com - Required Posting per H.B. 1522: The Taxpayer Impact Statement for the median-valued homestead in the City of Dallas is posted online at Taxpayer Impact Statement (Median Value) (Part 2 of 2)] MAYOR. WE ARE READY TO CONTINUE WITH THE BUDGET AMENDMENT PROCESS. I THINK WHEN WE CONCLUDED WE WERE MOVING TOWARD THE NEXT AMENDMENT. AND SO WE'LL TURN IT BACK OVER TO YOU TO RESTART THAT PROCESS. I WILL CHECK IN WITH COUNCILWOMAN BLAIR TO SEE IF SHE HAS A MOTION OR NOT. DO YOU? YES, SIR. OKAY, LET'S HEAR IT. IN. I AM LOOKING TO MOVE 66,000 598,000 FROM ARPA FUNDS IN ORDER TO OPERATE MY MCC OFFICE FOR MAINTENANCE, LANDSCAPING, ELECTRICITY, WATER, GAS, ETC., FOR MY DISTRICT OFFICE AT 3006 24 SIMPSON STEWART FOR THE NEXT YEAR. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND? ALL RIGHT. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES TO EXPLAIN THE ORDER, MR. MAYOR. STATE YOUR POINT OF ORDER. I'M NOT SURE THAT A DECISION BY THIS BODY IS NECESSARY ON THIS ITEM, SINCE THE USE OF FUNDS AND THE SOURCE OF FUNDS ARE BOTH FOR DISTRICT EIGHT. THE SOURCE IS DISTRICT EIGHT DISCRETIONARY FUNDS. I BELIEVE THAT THE COUNCIL MEMBER HAS THE AUTHORITY TO MAKE THAT TRANSFER HERSELF WITHOUT REQUIRING A VOTE OF THIS BODY. I'LL LET THE CITY MANAGER EXPLAIN IF THAT'S ACTUALLY ACCURATE. THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH. I THINK, COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY, TO ADDRESS THAT QUESTION. BECAUSE IN THIS PROPOSED BUDGET, THAT ACTUAL OFFICE WAS NOT RECOMMENDED FOR CONTINUATION. IT'S REALLY IT WOULD REALLY BE THE BODY SAYING TO ADD THAT BACK INTO THE BUDGET. I THINK THAT'S WHY THE AMENDMENT WAS PUT FORTH. SO IT WAS NOT RECOMMENDED TO CONTINUE THE OFFICE GOING INTO 2026. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO WE'RE GOING TO WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE WITH THE DISCUSSION LED BY COUNCILWOMAN BLAIR. YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES AGAIN FOR THE PUBLIC. WE ARE BACK ON THE THE CITY COUNCIL PROPOSED BUDGET AMENDMENTS PACKET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025 2026, AMENDMENT NUMBER FOUR BY MISS BLAIR. YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES THE DISTRICT EIGHT OFFICE AT 3624 SIMPSON STEWART ROAD, IS A VITAL TO THE RESIDENTS HISTORY AND CULTURE. WE ASSUME THIS ROLE. WHEN I RESUMED THIS ROLE AS COUNCIL MEMBER, ONE OF THE FIRST ITEMS I INHERITED WAS A POTENTIAL RELOCATION OF THE DISTRICT OFFICE. AFTER WORKING CLOSELY WITH CITY MANAGER AND HER STAFF, WE DETERMINED THAT KEEPING THE OFFICE AT ITS CURRENT LOCATION IS BEST AS IT SERVES THE NEEDS OF OUR RESIDENTS. TOGETHER, WE IDENTIFIED AVAILABLE RESOURCES TO MAKE THIS POSSIBLE WITHOUT IMPACTING THE OVERALL CITY BUDGET. SPECIFICALLY, WE ARE PROPOSING A ONE TIME ALLOCATION OF 66,000 598,000 FROM THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OPERA FUND FUND, A087 TO OPERA REDEVELOPMENT FUND TO COVER OPERATING EXPENSES INCLUDING MAINTENANCE, UTILITY, SECURITY AND LANDSCAPING FOR ONE TIME. THIS FUNDING ASSURES THE OFFICE REMAINS FULLY OPERATIONAL AND ACCESSIBLE TO OUR COMMUNITY. WHILE THE CITY MANAGER AND I CONTINUE TO COLLABORATE ON A PERMANENT SOLUTION, THE DISTRICT EIGHT COMMUNITY OFFICERS IS A LIFELINE FOR THE RESIDENTS WHERE WE ASSIST OVER 1100 PEOPLE EACH MONTH WITH SERVICES LIKE WICK HOUSING SUPPORT, NEIGHBORHOOD PROGRAMS, CODE COMPLIANCE RESOURCES AND DIRECT ENGAGEMENT WITH CITY REPRESENTATIVES. IT IS A TRUSTED SPACE WHERE NEIGHBORS COME TOGETHER, NEEDS ARE ADDRESSED, AND SOLUTIONS ARE BUILT COLLABORATIVELY. KEEPING THIS OFFICE OPEN PRESERVES ACCESSIBILITY, ENSURES CONTINUITY OF SERVICES, AND DEMONSTRATES THAT THOUGHTFUL COLLABORATION WITH MY CITY MANAGER AND HER STAFF. AT. WE CAN WORK TO LISTEN TO THE VOICES OF DISTRICT EIGHT RESIDENTS AND FIND SOLUTIONS THAT WORK [03:25:09] FOR EVERYONE. IT IS MY HOPE THAT WHEN THIS BUILDING IS EVENTUALLY DECOMMISSIONED FOR THE SECOND TIME AND PERMANENT PLANS ARE MADE FOR THE RELOCATION OF THE DISTRICT EIGHT OFFICE, IT WILL NOT BE LEFT AS AN UNOCCUPIED I SOURCE IN THE COMMUNITY, WHERE IT CREATES MORE HAVOC THAN WE NEEDED TO DO. THANK YOU. I THANK EVERYONE HERE FOR YOUR SUPPORT IN APPROVING THIS ALLOCATION. SO THE CITY SO THE DISTRICT EIGHT COMMUNITY OFFICE CAN CONTINUE TO SERVE AS THE HEART OF DISTRICT EIGHT. THANK YOU. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. AMENDMENT NUMBER FOUR. THANK YOU. I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THIS ITEM. AND I THINK THAT COUNCILMEMBER BLAIR LAID IT OUT BEAUTIFULLY ABOUT THE REASONS WHY. AND I LOVE THAT YOU ARE USING YOUR OWN DISCRETIONARY FUNDS TO KEEP IT OPEN. SO I'M VERY MUCH IN FAVOR. THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES, AMENDMENT NUMBER FOUR. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I TOO AM GOING TO SUPPORT COUNCILMAN BLAIR. COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT IS IMPORTANT. AND MAKING SURE THAT OUR CITIZENS HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO GO TO THAT LOCAL LOCATION. WHAT WE'RE DOING IS BRINGING LOCAL GOVERNANCE TO OUR COMMUNITY. SHE'S USING HER RESOURCES. SO, MR. BLAIR, I SUPPORT YOUR YOUR ITEM. THANK YOU. MR. BAZALDUA RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES, AMENDMENT NUMBER FOUR. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I TO SUPPORT AND LOOK FORWARD TO SUPPORTING THIS ITEM, BECAUSE I KNOW THAT THIS HAS BEEN A CRITICAL RESOURCE FOR YOUR COMMUNITY, BUT I JUST WANT TO COMMEND YOU COUNCIL MEMBER BLAIR, ESPECIALLY AS A NEW INCOMING COUNCIL MEMBER AND REALLY NAVIGATING WHAT TURNED IN TO BE SOMEWHAT OF A HIGH PROFILE ISSUE IN YOUR DISTRICT AND FINDING A VIABLE SOLUTION AND WORKING WITH OUR CITY MANAGER. I HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH HER AS WELL. AND AND SEEING THAT THE LONG TERM SOLUTION AND WHAT YOU HAVE THE POTENTIAL OF BRINGING FORTH IS BIGGER AND BETTER, AND AN OPPORTUNITY THAT I'M REALLY EXCITED TO ALSO SUPPORT IN YOUR NEXT PHASE. SO WAY TO GO IN GETTING SOMETHING TEMPORARY DONE OR TRANSITIONAL, IF YOU WILL. SO IT LIGHTENS THAT IMPACT OR BURDEN ON THE COMMUNITY. AND WE'VE GOT A FULL YEAR NOW TO GET SOME COMMUNICATION AND ALL OF THE LOGISTICS WORKED OUT SO THAT YOUR, YOUR SOLUTION MOVING FORWARD FOR LONG TERM IS GOING TO BE EVEN BIGGER AND BETTER FOR YOUR CONSTITUENTS. SO THANK YOU. AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR CITY MANAGER. THANK YOU. MAYOR. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST AMENDMENT NUMBER FOUR? SEEING NONE, PLEASE SIGNIFY YOUR SUPPORT BY DISPLAYING YOUR WITH WITH STILL TO RACE. I'M SORRY. WITH SEALS RAISED IN FAVOR. ROTH. BLAIR. KATANA. STEWART. BAZALDUA. BLACKMON. DEPUTY MAYOR TOM WILLIS. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM WILLIS. MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO COUNCIL MEMBERS RESENDEZ AS MENDELSOHN, RIDLEY, GRACEY AND JOHNSON WITH MAJORITY OF COUNCIL AND WEST IS ON RAISED HIS HAND. ONLINE, WITH MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS RAISING THEIR SEALS OR HAND IN FAVOR, THIS AMENDMENT MOVES FORWARD, MR. MAYOR. OKAY. IS THERE ANYONE WILLING TO ME? ALL RIGHT. MR. BLACKMON, YOU RECOGNIZE FOR A MOTION. THANK YOU. I MOVE THAT I MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND THE BUDGET AS WRITTEN BY AMENDMENT NUMBER FIVE. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND? IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. ANY DISCUSSION, MISS BLACKMON? SURE. FIVE MINUTES. WE ARE HERE AGAIN TALKING ABOUT THE SKILLMAN LIBRARY AND ALSO ABOUT A GREATER LOOK AT HOW OUR LIBRARY DELIVERS SERVICES. LAST YEAR I DID USE MY ARPA FUNDS. THIS YEAR THERE'S NONE LEFT IN D9 OR VERY FEW THAT ARE THAT ARE IN. SO I DID WORK WITH THE CITY MANAGER AND HER STAFF TO LOOK AT OTHER ARPA FUNDS VERSUS LOOKING AT WHAT ELSE NEEDS TO BE SWAPPED OUT IN THE BUDGET. WE'VE HEARD FROM OUR LIBRARY DIRECTOR. SHE'S NEW INTO THE ROLE THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT A DIFFERENT DELIVERY MODEL. AND SO IN ORDER TO DO THAT, I THINK THE SYSTEM MUST STAY INTACT. WE DID. WE HAVE TALKED TO THE VILLAGE. WE'VE LOOKED AT OTHER OPPORTUNITIES AROUND THERE. BUT BECAUSE OF THIS DISCUSSION OF HOW TO STRATEGICALLY MOVE OUR LIBRARY SYSTEM I FELT IT WAS GOOD TO TRY TO KEEP IT REOPENED. SO I DO HAVE SOME I DO HAVE SOME QUESTIONS, AND I DON'T KNOW IF Y'ALL ARE READY TO ANSWER, BUT I WILL POSE THEM. CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHAT THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF THE REDEVELOPMENT FUND FOR THE SEPTIC TANK SYSTEM IS OR WAS, AND HOW MUCH IS IN THIS? AND BY THE WAY, WE GET THIS ARPA MEMO, I THINK ONCE A MONTH. AND I THINK IT WAS GOING THROUGH GPM AS WELL. [03:30:01] SO IT'S, OBTAINABLE FOR US. I'LL GO AHEAD AND START AND I'LL HAVE THE BUDGET TEAM TO JUMP IN IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT I LEAVE OUT. SO THE ORIGINAL INTENDED PURPOSE WAS TO CONNECT OWNER OCCUPIED RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES TO NEWLY INSTALLED WATER AND WASTEWATER IN APPROXIMATELY 47 DIFFERENT AREAS AROUND THE CITY. THE AREAS ARE DEFINITELY IN VARIOUS STAGES OF CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION. WE KNOW THAT THERE'S AN ESTIMATED NUMBER OF ABOUT 400 POTENTIAL APPLICANTS. ONCE ALL OF THE CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETE. TO DATE, WE'VE IDENTIFIED AND NOTICED ABOUT 200 DIFFERENT CUSTOMERS IN THE AREA. WE DO ANTICIPATE CONTINUING THAT WORK, BUT THE PARTICIPATION TO DATE HAS BEEN ABOUT 23 RESIDENTIAL HOMES. IT'S AN AVERAGE OF ABOUT $16,000, I THINK 16,600, 800, 16,006 HUNDRED PER HOME. AND SO WHAT WE WILL DO IS CONTINUE TO LOOK AT ADDITIONAL WAYS TO BRING THOSE NEW HOMEOWNERS TO CONNECT TO OUR SYSTEM. BUT IT IS A CHOICE FOR THEM. IT'S NOT MANDATORY. AND WE HOPE TO BE CONTINUING THAT WORK OVER THE NEXT TWO YEARS. AND IF ADDITIONAL FUNDING IS NEEDED, ONCE WE IDENTIFY THOSE NEW OPPORTUNITIES, WE WOULD BUILD THAT BACK INTO THE BUDGET FOR THE UPCOMING YEAR. SO THAT'S KIND OF WHERE WE ARE TODAY. SO WE'RE NOT DEPLETING. WE'RE JUST USING PAST DATA TO DETERMINE FUTURE ACTIVITY. ABSOLUTELY. LEAVING MONEY TO ALLOCATE FOR THAT. EXACTLY. AND THEN BUT WE ALSO HAVE A FUND. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING FOR WHEN THAT DOES HAPPEN THAT WE'RE ACCUMULATING THROUGH THE DWU. YES. THAT WE COULD REPLENISH THAT THAT AMOUNT. YES, MA'AM. SO WE'RE NOT TAKING AWAY WE'RE NOT ROBBING FROM PETER TO GIVE TO PAUL. IT'S ACTUALLY A PROGRAM THAT WORKED FOR A BIT. IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO CONTINUE TO WORK FOR THE SAME BIT, BUT LET'S TAKE THAT MONEY AND USE IT HERE. THE MONEY IS THERE NOW FOR USE. AND AGAIN, AS WE IDENTIFIED THAT ADDITIONAL WORK, AS THOSE PROJECTS ARE BEING COMPLETED, WE WILL DEFINITELY WORK WITH THOSE HOMEOWNERS AND IF THEY CHOOSE TO CONNECT, WE'LL ENSURE THAT THERE'S FUNDING AVAILABLE. BUT THIS WOULD STILL LEAVE US WITH FUNDING FOR THE UPCOMING YEAR. EVEN WITH THE AMOUNT THAT YOU'VE IDENTIFIED FOR YOUR FOR YOUR USE FOR YOUR LIBRARY. AND CAN WE TALK ABOUT THE NEW PROPOSED STRATEGIC LOOK AT THE LIBRARY? I'LL STARTED, AND I KNOW THAT OUR LIBRARY DIRECTOR WILL PROBABLY COME OUT AND CLEAN UP ANYTHING THAT I MISCOMMUNICATE AS WE OUTLINED IN THE BUDGET, WE DEFINITELY UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS NOT A CHANGE THAT CAN HAPPEN OVERNIGHT. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT LOOKING AT THIS CITYWIDE. SO IT IS A COMPLETE SYSTEM CHANGE. AND WHAT WE INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET WAS AN OPPORTUNITY OVER THIS UPCOMING YEAR TO BE ABLE TO LOOK AT THIS REGIONAL MODEL, AS I MENTIONED, DURING THE BUDGET PRESENTATION BACK IN AUGUST WE DO NOT HAVE THE LOCATIONS IDENTIFIED. IN ORDER TO DO THIS, RIGHT. WE WANT TO TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO THE ROBUST ENGAGEMENT WE WANT TO BRING BACK THIS CONVERSATION AT THE COMMITTEE, COUNCIL, COMMITTEE LEVEL TO BE ABLE TO TALK ABOUT THE CRITERIA THAT WE'RE USING, LOOK AT THE DATA, DO THE DUE DILIGENCE OUT IN THE COMMUNITY, WORK WITH OUR LIBRARY BOARD. SO THERE'S A LOT OF PIECES OF THIS, THIS PROCESS THAT WE WOULD NEED TO PUT IN PLACE TO BE ABLE TO COME BACK AND MAKE THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS. THE GOAL WOULD BE TO GET THE RECOMMENDATIONS, BRING THAT TO THIS BODY IN THE NEXT YEAR, AND THEN WHATEVER IMPLEMENTATION AROUND THAT REGIONAL MODEL, IT WOULD BEGIN IN FY 27. SO IT SOUNDS LIKE COMMITTEE WORK. I THINK IT SHOULD BE COMMITTEE WORK. AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU SHOULD EXPECT FOR US TO BRING IT TO THE COMMITTEE. YES, MA'AM. SO THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. AND THANK YOU FOR BEING AT MY TOWN HALLS. THEY LOVE THEIR LIBRARY. CAN YOU TELL US A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT HAPPENS AT THAT LIBRARY? DO YOU KNOW? I KNOW THEY'VE TALKED ABOUT MAHJONG AND CROCHET AND EVERYTHING, BUT THEY. BUT DO YOU KNOW THE CIRCULATION AND THAT SORT OF STUFF? SURE. GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYONE. MONA SHAW, DIRECTOR OF THE DALLAS PUBLIC LIBRARY. THE SKILLMAN SOUTHWESTERN. SOUTHWESTERN LIBRARY IS. IS NO DOUBT A COMMUNITY. NEIGHBORHOOD LIBRARY, AND ONE THAT THE USERS LOVE. IT FALLS ABOUT HALFWAY DOWN ON OUR USER LIST WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT TRADITIONAL LIBRARY METRICS. TRADITIONAL LIBRARY METRICS WOULD BE THINGS LIKE CHECKOUT USER ENTRY TO THE LIBRARY PROGRAM ATTENDANCE, PROGRAM OFFERINGS. BUT TRADITIONAL LIBRARY METRICS ONLY SHOW HALF THE STORY. WE ALL KNOW THAT THE LIBRARY OF OUR CHILDHOOD IS NOT THE LIBRARY OF 2025, AND THAT THE LIBRARY WILL STILL HOUSING BOOKS AND OTHER MATERIALS. AND THAT'S STILL ONE OF THE CORE PILLARS THAT WE OFFER. THAT'S NOT THE ONLY WAY TO MEASURE SUCCESS IN A LIBRARY. WE OFFER WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT COMPUTERS THAT PEOPLE USE PRINTING ALONE. A LOT OF PEOPLE DO NOT HAVE ACCESS TO PRINTERS. WE OFFER SAFE SPACE FOR KIDS AFTER SCHOOL. PLACES FOR PEOPLE TO GO FOR FREE, WHICH THERE AREN'T VERY MANY PLACES LEFT. [03:35:04] I OFTEN SAY THAT IN CITY GOVERNMENT, YOU HAVE TWO REAL DEPARTMENTS THAT OFFER A FREE OPEN SPACE TO THE PUBLIC, AND THAT'S PARKS, AND LIBRARIES AND PARKS ARE HOT IN THE SUMMER, SO SOMETIMES EVEN JUST AIR CONDITIONING AND A COOL AND SAFE PLACE TO BE IS A SERVICE OFFERING. SO, WELL, IF YOU WERE TO ONLY LOOK AT THE TRADITIONAL LIBRARY OFFERINGS, YOU MIGHT THINK, WHY WOULD SKILLMAN BE ON THE LIST? IT'S WHEN YOU FACTOR IN EVERYTHING ELSE THAT IT BECOMES MORE CLEAR AS TO WHY A SMALL, POORLY DESIGNED LIBRARY LIKE SKILLMAN WOULD BE PUT ON THE LIST TO BE DECOMMISSIONED. AND THEN YOU LAYER ON THE FACT THAT THERE'S ALREADY WHAT I WOULD CONSIDER A REGIONAL LIBRARY VERY CLOSE BY IN VICKERY PARK, WHICH IS OUR ONLY LIBRARY THAT'S CURRENTLY OPEN SEVEN DAYS A WEEK. EXTENDED HOURS. THANK YOU. AND SO IT'S NOT GIVEN THAT. SKILLMAN, I KNOW YOU'VE LAID OUT SOME STUFF, BUT SKILLMAN IN SOUTHWEST IS NOT ON THE CLOSURE LIST. AFTER WE DO LIKE, IT'S GOING TO BE A CLEAN SLATE WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE WHOLE SYSTEM. I THINK THERE'S A NUANCED ANSWER TO THAT. COUNCIL MEMBER, BECAUSE SKILLMAN IS NOT CURRENTLY FUNDED. WELL, NO, I'M SAYING IF IT'S FUNDED, IF IT WERE, IF IT BECOMES FUNDED AND IT'S PART OF THE SYSTEM THAT YOU'RE GOING TO EVALUATE, IT'S NOT NECESSARILY AS THIS ONE'S GOING OFF. I'D LIKE TO JUMP IN BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO PREDETERMINE ANYTHING. I THINK THAT'S WHY WE WANTED TO TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT DEVELOPING THE CRITERIA THAT WILL BE UTILIZED TO GIVE US A MORE OF AN OBJECTIVE REVIEW OF THE ENTIRE SYSTEM AND AGAIN, BE ABLE TO BRING THAT BACK TO THE COUNCIL. SO FOR US TO NOW SAY WHAT WILL OR WILL NOT HAPPEN WITH SKILLMAN, I THINK MIGHT BE A LITTLE BIT PREMATURE UNTIL WE COME BACK AND DO THE BODY OF WORK THAT I THINK WE NEED TO DO IN THIS UPCOMING YEAR. SO I THINK IT WOULD BE PROBABLY NOT A RIGHT OR WRONG ANSWER FROM US AT THIS TIME. SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I JUMP IN. YES, MA'AM. IT'S NOT PREDETERMINED. THAT'S EXACTLY AN AUTOMATIC OFF THE. THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT. WE DID. EXACTLY. WE DO NOT HAVE A CURRENT LIST FOR ME TO SEND TO ANYONE ABOUT WHAT THE REGIONAL MODEL WILL LOOK LIKE, IN WHICH LIBRARIES WOULD GO OFFLINE AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU. AND SAY THAT THE FUNDING IS NOT AVAILABLE. WE DON'T HAVE A REALLY GREAT TRACK RECORD OF SHUTTING BUILDINGS DOWN. AND THEN I'M SORRY, SHUTTING THEM DOWN. AND, JACK, YOU WERE LOOKING AT ME, YOU KNOW, SHUTTING THEM DOWN TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE SECURE, THAT WE DON'T HAVE SITUATIONS HAPPENING AND THAT. SO WHAT WOULD BE THE PLAN? HOW MUCH MONEY IS ALLOCATED FOR THAT. AND ARE YOU PREPARED TO MAKE SURE THAT SECURITY IS THERE? COPPER IS TAKEN OUT. FURNITURES ARE DISPOSED OF. LIKE WE NEED TO SECURE THIS BECAUSE THE LAST THING I WANT IS AN ENCAMPMENT THAT I'M GOING TO BE CALLING IN EVERY DAY. THAT THAT WOULD DEFINITELY, AGAIN, BE BACK TO THE PROCESS BEFORE WE COME TO THE FOR THE END OF SEPTEMBER, THOUGH. EXACTLY. AND SO WE WOULD IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE REGIONAL PIECE, IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE PIECE NOW, THAT'S NOT A QUESTION FOR THE LIBRARY DIRECTOR. THAT'S THE DIRECTOR OF FACILITIES AND REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT. AND JOHN MAY NOT BE HERE EXACTLY, BUT WE CAN DEFINITELY MAKE SURE THAT WE SEND BACK WHATEVER FOLLOW UP RESPONSE. CAN YOU JUST GIVE ME A BALLPARK ABOUT LIKE, WHAT DOES IT USUALLY COST TO MAKE SURE AND HOW THE PROCESS HAPPENS? WELL, CONSIDERING THAT WE'VE HAD A HARD TIME CLOSING DOWN ANYTHING IT'S REALLY DIFFICULT FOR ME TO DO THAT. BUT I WILL TELL YOU THAT THAT WOULD BE BUILT INTO OUR DUE DILIGENCE ON THE EQUIPMENT AND THE BUILDING SERVICES SIDE. SO I WOULD, I WOULDN'T I WOULDN'T SAY WHAT THE NUMBER IS AT THIS POINT. UNTIL WE DO THE WORK, THEY HAVE WORKED VERY SUCCESSFULLY WITH A BROKER. AS YOU GUYS KNOW, WE'VE BEEN WORKING THROUGH THAT TO WHERE WE CAN ACTUALLY BE ABLE TO TURN THOSE FACILITIES OVER TO SOMEONE WHO WOULD THEN MANAGE IT FOR US AND THE WHOLE PROCESS. AND THAT'S KIND OF HOW WE ACTUALLY ENDED UP WITH FINALLY GETTING SOMETHING OFF OF OUR BOOKS WITH THE SAINT PAUL LOCATION, TIME. BILLY RAY. SO AND THE WHOLE POINT IS, I MEAN, WE'VE HAD, I THINK, THREE. I MEAN, THERE'S BEEN A FEW FACILITIES. WE'RE NOT REALLY GOOD AT THAT. AND I DON'T THINK ANYBODY WANTS A CLOSED BUILDING IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD TO TO STAND THERE TO ATTRACT SOMETHING. AND SO IF ANYTHING, WE AT LEAST HAVE ACTIVITY HERE. AND IF IT HAS TO END SOONER OR WHATEVER, BUT I REALLY WOULD LOVE TO HAVE IT FOR A WHOLE YEAR AND OR AT LEAST TILL THE PROCESS HAPPENS. AND WE, WE DECIDE ON A NEW MODEL. AND BUT I MEAN, GIVEN THAT WE DON'T HAVE A GOOD TRACK RECORD, I THINK KEEPING IT OPEN IS A GOOD STRATEGY GIVEN THAT IT'S $386,000. AND UNTIL WE CAN FIGURE OUT THE WHOLE SYSTEM AND HAVE THAT PART OF THE DISCUSSION AS WELL, BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND THE WHOLE VICKERY MEADOW THAT'S ACROSS THE WAY. [03:40:04] BUT IF YOU'VE EVER TRIED TO PLAY, TRY TO CROSS NORTHWEST HIGHWAY. IT'S NEVER FUN IN A CAR, MUCH LESS ON FOOT. SO AND I'M SURE DART, I DIDN'T MAP IT OUT, BUT I'M SURE DART DOESN'T TAKE YOU THERE THAT EASY. SO ANYWAY, I HOPE THAT PEOPLE WILL SUPPORT THIS. IT'S A COMMUNITY FACILITY, AND IT IS UTILIZED AND PEOPLE ARE PASSIONATE ABOUT IT. SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT NUMBER FIVE. THANK YOU. SO WHEN I DO A STRAIGHT LINE DISTANCE BETWEEN THIS LIBRARY IN VICKERY. IT'S 1.03 MILES DISTANCE. DOES THAT SOUND RIGHT? COUNCIL MEMBER. I'M LESS FAMILIAR WITH DALLAS THAN YOU ARE, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS LESS THAN TWO MILES, SO I'LL GO WITH THAT. AND IF YOU DO IT STREET BY STREET, THAT'S THAT'S PROBABLY 1.2 AT THAT POINT. SO WOULD IT MAKE SENSE THAT WHEN WE OPENED VICKERY IN 2020 1ST FEBRUARY 2021, THAT THAT REALLY WOULD HAVE BEEN THE APPROPRIATE TIME TO CLOSE THE VERY SMALL SKILLMAN SOUTHWEST LIBRARY? I DON'T THINK IN 2021 WE WERE TALKING ABOUT CLOSING LIBRARIES. WHAT WE'VE BEEN DRIVING TOWARDS MY UNDERSTANDING FOR THE LAST 30 YEARS IS THE FACILITIES MASTER PLAN THAT REALLY DICTATED MORE LIBRARIES WITH A REAL NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERED MODEL, AND THAT'S REALLY WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO ACHIEVE, WAS THAT EVERY CULTURAL, NEIGHBORHOOD OR DEFINED NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD HAVE ITS OWN BRANCH LIBRARY. AND CITY MANAGER. ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH HOW MANY NEIGHBORHOODS WE WOULD ACTUALLY HAVE IN DALLAS? KNOW IN MY DISTRICT I WOULD GUESS IT WOULD BE MORE THAN 30 DISTINCT NEIGHBORHOODS. WOULD YOU CONTEMPLATE HAVING 30 LIBRARIES IN JUST MY DISTRICT? NO. NO. LIBRARIES ARE A FABULOUS AMENITY. I'M A BIG LIBRARY FAN AND SUPPORTER. HOWEVER, WE CAN'T HAVE A LIBRARY FOR EVERY SINGLE NEIGHBORHOOD. THAT DOESN'T EVEN MAKE SENSE. SO. SO LET ME JUST SAY THIS. WHY WAS THIS ONE SLATED TO CLOSE LAST YEAR? DO YOU KNOW LAST YEAR MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT THERE WERE BUDGET SAVINGS. AND WE WERE ASKED TO REALLY LOOK CAREFULLY AT THE CAMPUS AND TO FIND SAVINGS IN THE BUDGET. AND THIS ONE WAS THE ONE THAT WAS CHOSEN FOR THE REASON YOU ARTICULATED, WHICH IS THAT IT'S QUITE CLOSE TO A NEW LIBRARY THAT'S OPEN SEVEN DAYS A WEEK. OKAY. CAN YOU GO OVER THE SOURCE OF THOSE FUNDS? SO WE'VE GOT HERE WE GO. HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, ARPA. CAN YOU TALK ABOUT WHAT THAT ARPA FUNDING WAS FOR? SO AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, LET ME GO BACK TO MY NOTES. SO THE PURPOSE OF THOSE FUNDS, DURING THE TIME THAT WE WERE LOOKING AT THE DIFFERENT ALLOCATIONS AND LINE ITEMS FOR ARPA FUNDING, WAS TO CONNECT OWNER OCCUPIED RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES TO NEWLY INSTALLED WATER AND WASTEWATER IN ABOUT 47 AREAS ACROSS THE CITY. SO IT WAS A IT WAS A SEPTIC PROGRAM. MOSTLY THEY'RE IN DISTRICT EIGHT. THERE'S A COUPLE PROPERTIES, ACTUALLY, IN DISTRICT 12. I THINK WE'RE THE ONLY TWO THAT HAD THE SEPTIC TANKS. IS THAT CORRECT? THERE'S A MAJORITY OF THEM ARE IN THE SOUTHERN PART OF THE CITY IN DISTRICT EIGHT. YES, MA'AM. AND ACTUALLY, WE HAD A MAYOR PRO TEM WHO REPEATEDLY HAD VERY ANIMATED DISCUSSIONS ABOUT HOW WRONG IT WAS THAT PEOPLE IN HIS DISTRICT WERE ON THE SEPTIC TANKS. AND HE MADE IT SORT OF AN EQUITY ISSUE. HE MADE IT AN ISSUE THAT PEOPLE WERE BEING OVERLOOKED. AND MY QUESTION IS, WHAT KIND OF OUTREACH HAS HAPPENED FOR THE IDENTIFIED, WHICH I KNOW? THE WATER DEPARTMENT LITERALLY SHOWED US THE MAPS OF WHERE PEOPLE ARE AND HOW MANY THERE ARE. WHAT OUTREACH HAS HAPPENED? ARE WE ASKING PEOPLE TO CERTIFY THEY'RE NOT INTERESTED IN DOING IT SO THAT WE KNOW, OKAY, OF THE NUMBERS IDENTIFIED, ACTUALLY, THIS MANY ARE NOT INTERESTED. THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. AND I'LL START. AND AGAIN, I'LL HAVE STAFF TO COME OUT AND ADD ADDITIONAL COMMENTARY TO TO MY COMMENTS. WHEN THE PROGRAM WAS ORIGINALLY SET UP, I BELIEVE THAT WE WERE LOOKING AT ABOUT 400 DIFFERENT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES THAT WERE WITHIN THAT 47 THOSE 47 AREAS. WE'VE HAD DIRECT OUTREACH WITH OVER 200 DIFFERENT HOMEOWNERS IN THAT AREA. BUT AGAIN, IT'S BASED ON THE COMPLETION OF DOING THE CONNECTION. SO HAVING THAT WHITE WATER AND WASTEWATER THOSE LINES INSTALLED. SO WE DO WE WILL CONTINUE THE OUTREACH. HOWEVER, THE PROGRAM IS DESIGNED TO WHERE THE HOMEOWNERS HAVE TO AGREE TO DO THE [03:45:03] CONNECTION. IT'S NOT MANDATORY FOR THEM TO DO THE CONNECTION. SO IT'S A CHOICE THAT THEY AS AN INDIVIDUAL HOMEOWNER CAN MAKE. AND SO WHAT WE HAVE SEEN OVER THIS LAST YEAR OR SO, WE'VE HAD ABOUT 23 OF THE 200 THAT WE'VE DONE NOTIFICATIONS. WE HAVE ABOUT 23 WHO HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN ABLE TO MAKE THE CONNECTION. AND I TALKED ABOUT THE NUMBER DOLLAR AMOUNT. IT'S ABOUT $16,600. SO WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO DO ABOUT 23 TO DATE. WELL, WHAT I KNOW IS THAT THIS IS OFTEN USED AS A TALKING POINT ABOUT THE DISPARITIES BETWEEN THE NORTH AND THE SOUTH AND THE DIVISIONS, I THINK NEVER HAS A TALE OF TWO CITIES NOT BEEN SAID WITH THIS ITEM. AND IF WE USE THIS MONEY FOR THIS, I DON'T EXPECT TO HAVE THIS COME BACK AGAIN, BECAUSE LITERALLY YOU'RE TAKING MONEY THAT'S DESIGNATED FOR THE SOUTH AND MOVING TO KEEP OPEN A LIBRARY THAT EVERYONE CAN OBVIOUSLY SEE SHOULD NOT STAY OPEN WHEN IT IS ONE MILE FROM A SEVEN DAY A WEEK LIBRARY, OR ONLY SEVEN DAY A WEEK LIBRARY. SO FOR THE FOR THE DOLLAR AMOUNT OF 386,612, CAN YOU TELL US DOES THAT INCLUDE STAFF? I'M GONNA ASK YOU A WHOLE BUNCH OF THESE. IT'S REALLY A YES NO. THAT'S FINE. YEAH, ABSOLUTELY IT DOES. IT'S ONE, TWO, THREE STAFF. DOES IT INCLUDE UPDATING THE THE COLLECTION? IT INCLUDES MAINTAINING THE COLLECTION FOR THE YEAR THAT IT'S OPEN. SO WE WILL GET NEW BOOKS CORRECT? YES. EVEN THOUGH IT'S SLATED TO CLOSE. YES. BECAUSE WHAT WE HAVE AT THE DALLAS PUBLIC LIBRARY IS WHAT'S CALLED A FLOATING COLLECTION. SO BOOKS AND OTHER MATERIAL DON'T HAVE AN ACTUAL HOME. THEY ARE PART OF THE SYSTEM. SO, FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU WERE TO PUT A BOOK ON HOLD AND PICK IT UP AT RENNER AND THEN RETURN IT AT SKILLMAN, IT WOULD STAY AT SKILLMAN. SO WE'RE ESSENTIALLY ALWAYS BUYING BOOKS FOR THE SYSTEM. WOULD IT BE ELIGIBLE FOR ANY BUILDING MAINTENANCE OR REPAIR? THAT IS A QUESTION FOR FRME, NOT FOR ME. WOULD THIS AMOUNT INCLUDE THE MOWING AND THE TRIMMING OF THE OUTSIDE BUSHES? MY UNDERSTANDING I SEE JOHN, I SEE JOHN. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE LANDSCAPING IS DONE. I'M GOING TO LET JOHN ANSWER THIS ONE. SURE. YOU CAN BE MY WINGMAN. CITY MANAGER REALLY SUPPORTS TEAMWORK. SO THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO GET TODAY. EXCUSE ME. DONZELL GIBSON, CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE. AND YES, THE SUPPORT FOR FACILITIES MAINTENANCE OVER THE COURSE OF THAT YEAR WILL BE IN PLACE. SO DOES IT DOES THAT DOLLAR AMOUNT THE 386,000 INCLUDE THE OUTSIDE LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE? YES IT DOES. DOES IT INCLUDE THE EXTERMINATOR? YES. DOES IT INCLUDE SECURITY? THERE'S NO SECURITY AT THAT BRANCH, I'M BEING TOLD. DOES IT INCLUDE ELECTRICITY? YES. HOW ABOUT WI-FI AND INTERNET? YES, MA'AM. CLEANING THE BUILDING? YES. AND WHAT ABOUT PICKING UP SANITATION? THE GARBAGE? I BELIEVE THE ANSWER SHOULD BE YES, BUT I'LL CONFIRM. AND DOES IT INCLUDE. WE WOULDN'T KEEP THE FACILITY OPEN WITHOUT THAT TYPE OF SANITARY COLLECTION, SO IT WOULD BE DONE. BUT I'M JUST ASKING IF THIS DOLLAR AMOUNT IS INCLUSIVE OF THAT. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING. THE ANSWER IS YES, MA'AM. OKAY. AND WHAT ABOUT INTER-DEPARTMENTAL? INTER-DEPARTMENTAL? PLEASE DEFINE OUR SACRED CODE ITEMS. YES, MA'AM. OKAY, SO CAN YOU TALK ABOUT HOW EFFECTIVE A BRANCH LIBRARY IS IF IT'S ONLY OPEN THREE DAYS A WEEK, EIGHT HOURS A DAY? IT'S EFFECTIVE WHEN IT'S OPEN, BUT IT'S LIMITED. WE'RE ONLY ABLE TO OFFER PRETTY LIMITED SERVICES WHEN YOU'RE TALKING THREE DAYS A WEEK, EIGHT HOURS A DAY. AND THE PLAN IS, IS NOT TO OFFER PROGRAMS OR OUTREACH. IT'S REALLY JUST OPENING THE DOORS AND HAVING THE COLLECTION AVAILABLE AND THE SPACE AVAILABLE. MANAGER. IF THE CITY IF THIS LIBRARY CLOSES, WOULD IT BE THE CITY'S INTENT TO SELL THE PROPERTY? WE WOULD DEFINITELY WORK ON IDENTIFYING THE BEST USE. WE'VE OF COURSE, AS PART OF THIS BUDGET AS THIS COUNCIL KNOWS THAT WE'VE ADDED FUNDING FOR REAL ESTATE MASTER PLAN BECAUSE WE DO UNDERSTAND THE NEED TO BE ABLE TO REDEFINE A LOT OF THE ASSETS THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE HOPEFULLY BRINGING TO YOU FOR DISCUSSION IN THE FUTURE. SO WE WOULD DEFINITELY BE LOOKING AT THAT AND WOULD BRING BACK RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL BEFORE MOVING IT TO A SURPLUS PROPERTY STATUS. [03:50:05] BUT WE WOULD DEFINITELY WORK WITH THE COUNCIL FOR THAT. AND WHAT HAPPENS TO THE PROCEEDS SHOULD IT SELL? RIGHT NOW, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING AND OUR EXISTING PROCESS THAT ALL PROCEEDS GO ACTUALLY INTO MAJOR MAINTENANCE, WHICH IS A FUND THAT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED AND AVAILABLE FOR QUITE SOME TIME. WE HAD TALKED EARLIER IN THE SPRING ABOUT COMING BACK TO THIS BODY TO MAKE SOME POLICY DECISIONS ABOUT THE USE OF THAT FUND, AND HOW PROCEEDS EITHER MOVE INTO THAT FUND OR OTHER BUCKETS TO SUPPORT CITY SERVICES. BUT WE NEED TO BRING THAT POLICY CONVERSATION BACK TO THE COUNCIL. BUT IT WOULD GO INTO MAJOR MAINTENANCE. IF WE'RE UNDER THE EXISTING POLICY, THAT'S WHERE THE FUNDS WOULD GO. AND IS THAT FUND PROPERLY CAPITALIZED OR DO YOU NEED MORE FUNDS FOR MAINTENANCE? AS YOU KNOW, IN JUNE OF THIS YEAR, WE CAME TO CITY COUNCIL WITH A PROPOSED FACILITIES PROGRAM AROUND PROACTIVE MAINTENANCE AS WELL AS MAJOR MAINTENANCE NEEDS. AND IN THIS BUDGET, WE'VE INCLUDED ADDITIONAL FUNDING TO BE ABLE TO RAMP UP AND BEGIN TO KIND OF LIVE OUT THE APPROACH THAT WE PROVIDED TO THE COUNCIL PREVIOUSLY. SO WE'VE ADDED WE'VE ADDED MORE FUNDING IN THIS BUDGET TO BE ABLE TO DEAL WITH PROACTIVE MAJOR MAINTENANCE. AND IF YOU SOLD THIS PROPERTY TO A FOR PROFIT COMPANY, WOULD WE COLLECT REVENUE FOR OUR PROPERTY TAXES? YES. AND IF IT WAS A RETAIL OPERATION, WOULD WE ALSO COLLECT SALES TAX REVENUE? YES, MA'AM. OKAY. WELL, I'M I'M GOING TO SAY ONE OTHER THING. LAST YEAR, I BELIEVE. COULD YOU CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, THAT THE SOURCE OF FUNDS TO KEEP IT OPEN THIS YEAR WAS THE COUNCIL MEMBERS DESIGNATED ARPA FUNDS FOR THAT DISTRICT? THAT IS CORRECT. AND WHY WOULDN'T THAT BE THE USE OF FUNDS THIS YEAR? I BELIEVE THE ARPA FUNDS FOR THAT DISTRICT HAVE BEEN FULLY USED EXCEPT FOR ABOUT $40,000, $45,000. OKAY. WELL, I THINK THE ONE TIME CHANCE HAPPENED. THIS WAS TOLD AS A ONE TIME THING. WE ARE PAST THAT, AND I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THE CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION TO CLOSE THE LIBRARY. SO I WILL BE VOTING NO ON THIS AMENDMENT. THANK YOU. MR. BAZALDUA YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON ITEM NUMBER, AMENDMENT NUMBER FIVE. THANK YOU. MAYOR. AND I GUESS I'D LIKE TO ASK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THE USE OF THE UNENCUMBERED FUNDS. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE'S SEVERAL RESIDENTS WHO WERE PUT ON THIS PROGRAM THAT WE'VE INVESTED IN THAT HAVE EXPRESSED PRETTY CLEAR OPPOSITION IN US EVEN INVESTING IN IT. AND I THINK THAT THERE'S A FEAR AMONG SOME, I GUESS, RURAL DWELLERS, IF YOU WILL, WITH STILL WITHIN OUR CITY, BUT THEY DON'T WANT TO SEE THIS SPUR A LOT OF DEVELOPMENT. SO WE'VE ACTUALLY HAD PUSHBACK FROM THE VERY RESIDENTS THIS WAS INTENDED TO SERVE. IS THAT ACCURATE? THAT IS CORRECT. AND I THINK THAT SPEAKS TO WHEN I TALKED ABOUT THE NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL HOMES WHO ARE NOW PARTICIPATING IN THE PROGRAM, I THINK IT'S EVIDENT BECAUSE AGAIN, IT'S WE CAN'T MAKE SOMEONE WANT TO MAKE THAT CONNECTION OR THAT THAT TRANSITION FROM THEIR SEWER THEIR SEPTIC SYSTEM. EXCUSE ME. OVER TO OUR CONNECTION. IT'S A VOLUNTARY PROGRAM. AND SO WHAT I MENTIONED IS THAT WE HAVE DONE THE OUTREACH. WE WILL CONTINUE TO DO THE OUTREACH AND MAKE SURE THAT THOSE THAT CHOOSE TO CONNECT, THAT THAT WILL BE FUNDING AVAILABLE FOR THEM TO DO SO. BUT IT HAS NOT BEEN A PROGRAM THAT HAS PROGRESSED. I THINK IN THE SAME SPIRIT THAT WE INTENDED WHEN WE LAID THE PROGRAM OUT, WE HAVE HEARD THROUGH SOME COMMUNITY COMMUNITY CONVERSATIONS AND ENGAGEMENT IN THOSE AREAS THAT SOME RESIDENTS FEEL THAT CONNECTING TO OUR SYSTEM WILL BRING ADDITIONAL UNWANTED DEVELOPMENT TO THEIR AREAS. AND AGAIN, IT'S A CHOICE. AND SO WE'LL CONTINUE TO DO THE WORK. WE KNOW THAT THIS COUNCIL SET THIS UP TO, TO ADDRESS, AS COUNCILWOMAN MENDELSOHN MENTIONED, SOME OF THOSE INEQUITIES AND PARTS OF OUR CITY, SPECIFICALLY IN DISTRICT EIGHT. AND WE ARE TRYING AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO TRY, EVEN WITH FUNDING THAT IS LEFT TO BE ABLE TO GET THOSE HOMEOWNERS INTO THE PROGRAM. BUT IT IS THEIR CHOICE AND IT IS THEIR OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO OR NOT. WE CANNOT MANDATE THAT. AND IS IT SAFE TO SAY THAT SOME OF THAT FEEDBACK THAT WE'VE HEARD FROM RESIDENTS, AND WHY THIS PARTICIPATION HAS BEEN SO LOW, IS THAT FEAR OF UNWANTED DEVELOPMENT IS ACTUALLY ONE THAT EQUATES TO GENTRIFICATION AND OR DISPLACEMENT ON THEM BEING ABLE TO CONTINUE TO AFFORD TO LIVE IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA. I THINK YOU'VE STATED IT CORRECTLY, THAT THAT'S THAT'S A LOT OF THE FEEDBACK THAT WE'VE HEARD. AND WE ALSO LEARNED THAT WE HAVE SOME OF OUR TEAM MEMBERS WHO HAVE WHO FORMER TEAM MEMBERS WHO LIVE IN THAT AREA, WHO'VE ALSO EXPRESSED THAT QUITE CLEARLY, THAT THAT'S A LOT OF THE CONVERSATIONS THAT ARE HAPPENING IN THAT PART OF THE CITY. [03:55:03] THANK YOU. I WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT BECAUSE AS NOBLE OF OF A REASONING AS IT IS TO HONOR THE NORTH AND SOUTH DIVIDE THAT WE DO OFTEN SPEAK ABOUT. I THINK THAT IT'S FIRST AND FOREMOST IMPORTANT TO HEAR FROM RESIDENTS WHO ACTUALLY LIVE IN THE SOUTH AND NOT HAVE MEMBERS OF NORTH DALLAS MAKING DECISIONS FOR WHAT'S BEST IN THE SOUTH. I THINK THAT'S HOW WE GOT HERE, ACTUALLY. SO HEARING FROM CONSTITUENTS SPECIFICALLY ABOUT WANTING TO SEE THESE DOLLARS BETTER SPENT AND FOR US TO NOT IN FACT, TAKE ACTION THAT EXACERBATES DISPLACEMENT AND GENTRIFICATION IS THE REASON THAT I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS USE. BECAUSE I'VE HEARD FROM RESIDENTS WHO HAVE ASKED US TO NOT PRIORITIZE THIS FOR THE REASONS THAT YOU'VE HAD. I DON'T NECESSARILY UNDERSTAND IT, BUT I DON'T UNDERSTAND A LOT OF WHAT NEIGHBORHOOD SELF-DETERMINATION IS. THAT'S WHY IT'S DETERMINED BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IS IMPACTED. IN ADDITION TO THAT, I JUST THINK FUNDAMENTALLY, WE HEAR OFTEN A LOT OF TALKING OUT OF BOTH SIDES OF OUR MOUTHS. AND WHEN WE TALK ABOUT CORE SERVICES THAT OUR CITY IS SUPPOSED TO PROVIDE, I THINK THAT IF WE HAVE THE ABILITY NOW TO SAVE THE ONLY PROPOSED CLOSING LIBRARY IN A BUDGET THAT IS IN FACT CUTTING OUR TAX RATE US AS REPRESENTATIVES FOR THIS CITY, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT IT IS PRODUCTIVE FOR US TO PASS A BUDGET THAT IS ACTUALLY LEAVING TAXES ON THE TABLE WHILE CLOSING NEIGHBORHOODS, LIBRARIES, ESPECIALLY WITHOUT A PLAN. I ALSO RESPECT HEARING THAT THERE WAS REASONING THAT ONE YEAR WOULD HAVE BEEN THE REASON. QUITE FRANKLY. CITY MANAGER, I KNOW THAT WE'VE HAD A LOT OF THINGS GOING ON, AND BUT I WOULD BE LESS APT TO SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT HAD WE IMPLEMENTED A MORE LONGER TERM PLAN. AFTER THAT, ONE TIME. USE WAS DONE LAST YEAR WITHOUT THAT PIECE BEING EXECUTED. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT IT IS IRRESPONSIBLE FOR US TO CONTINUE TO PUSH YOU TO DO EXACTLY WHAT WE ASKED FOR LAST YEAR. LET'S GET THAT LONG TERM STRATEGIC PLAN. LET'S FIGURE OUT HOW WE'RE GOING TO ADDRESS OUR LIBRARY SYSTEM AS A SYSTEM THAT DOESN'T JUST ONE OFF PICK SOME OF OUR LIBRARY GOERS TO BE IMPACTED. I KNOW THAT I'VE RECEIVED JUST AS I DID LAST YEAR AND SPOKE ABOUT IT. I'VE RECEIVED FEEDBACK SPECIFICALLY FROM DISTRICT SEVEN RESIDENTS WHO SAY THAT THEY UTILIZE THIS ON TOP OF HEARING FROM MANY PEOPLE. IN FACT, THERE WAS PEOPLE AT BOTH OF MY BUDGET TOWN HALLS SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS BRANCH OF LIBRARY. IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE EXERCISES TO HEAR FROM THE PUBLIC, IF WE'RE GOING TO ENCOURAGE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT, AND WE HEAR PEOPLE ORGANIZE AND TRY TO HAVE THEIR VOICE HEARD. I WOULD BELIEVE IT WOULD BE COUNTERPRODUCTIVE FOR US TO NOT DO WHAT WE CAN TO ACCOMPLISH WHAT WE'VE HEARD FROM THE PUBLIC. THIS IS A SMALL FEAT. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT IT'S COMING AT THE COMPROMISE OF ANY CORE SERVICES THAT ARE BEING OFFERED RIGHT NOW. AND I DO BELIEVE THAT THIS IS A GOOD ONE TIME USE IF WE'RE HAVING THE COMMITMENT FROM OUR CITY MANAGER TO COME BACK WITH A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND LONG TERM SOLUTION MOVING FORWARD. SO I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS. I APPRECIATE MY COLLEAGUE, MISS BLACKMON, FOR LOOKING AT SOLUTIONS TO KEEP OUR CORE SERVICES ACROSS OUR CITY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MISS BLAIR, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT NUMBER FIVE. I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS. I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'RE. THIS SAYS THIS IS FOR HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WOULD BE HOUSING OR. BUT WE ALSO SAID THIS IS WASTEWATER AND SEWER LINES. SO IF THAT WOULD BE. OH, MISS STANIFORD. SO GOOD AFTERNOON, CYNTHIA ELLISON, DIRECTOR FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. ORIGINALLY, THE PROGRAM CAME TO THE HOUSING DEPARTMENT BECAUSE IT WAS CONSIDERED HOME REPAIR TO ADD WATER LINES TO REPLACE SEPTIC TANKS. SO HOUSING WAS GIVEN THE MONEY TO ORIGINALLY MANAGE SO THAT IT COULD BE PART OF OUR MENU OF HOUSING IMPROVEMENTS. SO THIS BY NO CHANCE HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH HOUSING REPAIR AS A HOUSE. JUST IT HAS EVERYTHING TO DO WITH WATER SERVICES. SO THEN I GUESS MY QUESTION WOULD BE FOR MISS STANFORD. [04:00:01] THE WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO HOW THESE THESE FUNDS ARE BEING UTILIZED AND HOW THEY HAD BEEN BEEN PLANNED. CAN YOU SHARE WITH THIS BODY HOW WE'VE GONE THROUGH THE SEPTIC TANK TRANSFORMATION FROM 400 UNITS DOWN TO TWO, DOWN TO 23, DOWN TO. WE'RE THROUGH. SO. YES, MA'AM. SARAH STANDIFORD, DALLAS WATER UTILITIES. AS CYNTHIA WAS MENTIONING, THESE WERE FUNDS THAT WERE ALLOCATED AS PART OF THAT WASTEWATER AND WATER INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM FUNDING IN THE EARLY DAYS OF ARPA, UNDER THE DEDICATED ACCOUNTS, BECAUSE HOUSING HAD A MECHANISM IN PLACE THAT ALREADY DID PLUMBING REPAIR, IT MADE MORE SENSE TO UTILIZE THEIR TEAMS. WE WORKED WITH THEM TO IDENTIFY THE NUMBER OF OCCUPIED RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES THAT WERE ESTIMATED ALONG THE ROUTES. SO IN THOSE 47 AREAS. WE WERE GOING TO BE PUTTING IN SOME WATER INFRASTRUCTURE, PRIMARILY WASTEWATER. SO CITY LINES IN THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET, THOSE TYPES OF AREAS. ONE OF THE BIG THINGS AT THE TIME THAT WAS IMPORTANT TO EVERYONE WAS THAT WE WERE PUTTING A BURDEN ON A HOMEOWNER TO CONNECT. AND SO ABSENT OF ANY FUNDING SOURCES, THERE WAS NOT GOING TO BE AN EASY CONNECTION FOR THEM BECAUSE SOME OF THESE, AS YOU'VE HEARD, ARE ABOUT $16,600 ON AVERAGE. SO THE PROGRAM WAS ESTABLISHED WORKING WITH HOUSING. THEY DID DIRECT MAILERS. THEY HAVE A WEBSITE THAT YOU COULD GO LOOK AT. ALSO, IN ADDITION TO THAT, WE HELD COMMUNITY MEETINGS IN SUPPORT WITH THEM. AS MENTIONED, ABOUT 23 HOMEOWNERS DECIDED TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT PROGRAM. AND THAT FIRST 200 ARE THOSE THAT HAVE A LINE TODAY. AS THE CITY MANAGER MENTIONED, WE ARE UNDER CONSTRUCTION OVER THE NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS TO WRAP UP THE NEXT SETS OF WORK. AND THAT'S ABOUT ANOTHER 200 HOMES THAT WE WILL WORK WITH EVERYBODY TO BRING ONLINE. SO TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY HEARS. IT COST EACH HOMEOWNER ABOUT $16,000 TO CONNECT FROM THEIR RESIDENTIAL SEWER SERVICES, FROM SEPTIC ONTO THE CITY SERVICES. IS THAT NOT CORRECT? IT IS DONE AS A TRIPARTITE AGREEMENT RIGHT NOW WITH THE CITY, THE HOMEOWNER AND THE PLUMBING COMPANY, AND THIS FUNDING OFFSETS THE HOMEOWNERS RESPONSIBILITY, BUT IT COSTS ABOUT $16,000 TO GET IT DONE. CORRECT. THAT IS THE CURRENT AND AND WHAT WE HEARD WAS THAT OUR THERE ARE RESIDENTS IN MY MY FAR EAST SECTION WHO CHOOSE NOT TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROGRAM BECAUSE THEY WANT TO STAY RULE. IS THAT NOT CORRECT? THERE ARE PLENTY OF YOUR CONSTITUENTS WHO HAVE DECLINED TO PARTICIPATE TO DATE. SO ANY ANY OF THE RESIDENTS IN DISTRICT EIGHT, IN THE RURAL SECTION WHO CHOOSE TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROGRAM. THEY HAVE BEEN GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY, THE AVAILABILITY AND THE RESOURCES IN ORDER TO DO SO. IS THAT CORRECT? YES, MA'AM. FOR THOSE AREAS THAT ARE COMPLETED TO DATE. AND AS YOU GO, CONTINUE GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS, THOSE THAT ARE STILL ABLE TO DO WHO CHOOSE TO DO SO TIME THEY CAN ALSO COME IN AND PARTICIPATE TODAY. CORRECT? YES, MA'AM. AND WHAT WE WILL ALSO DO MOVING FORWARD, AS THE CITY MANAGER MENTIONED, IS THAT WE WILL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE COMMUNITIES, AND WHEN WE DO EXHAUST FUNDING, THEN WE WILL LOOK FOR FUTURE FUNDING. AND THESE AND AS WE AND I'VE HAD DISCUSSION WITH MY COUNTERPART FOR THOSE WHO DID NOT KNOW, WE SHE AND I HAD HAVE HAD CONVERSATIONS AND WE'VE HAD OPEN DIALOG SO THAT THIS OPPORTUNITY IS JUST LIKE WITH MY FACILITY, A ONE TIME OPPORTUNITY IN ORDER TO BETTER, BEST USE SERVICES AND FUNDING. EVEN THOUGH IT'S COMING FROM MY, MY COFFERS TO BETTER SUPPORT, BUT IT'S ONLY SERVICES THAT CAN BE USED FOR WASTEWATER CONNECTION AND NOT FOR ANYTHING ELSE. SO I WANT TO JUST JUMP IN FOR JUST A SECOND AND THANK YOU, MISS STANDARD, FOR FOR YOUR RESPONSES. THIS WAS A DEDICATED PROGRAM THROUGH ARPA DOLLARS. IT'S NOT A GENERAL FUND PROGRAM. AND WE DID IT WITH THE ARPA DOLLARS BECAUSE WE DEFINITELY WANTED TO SEE HOW THE PROGRAM WOULD PROGRESS. AND SO WHAT YOU'VE HEARD TODAY IS THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING IT. THERE'S AREAS WHERE WE'VE COMPLETED THE ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION FOR THOSE LINES, THEIR RESIDENTS WHO HAVE BEEN GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO CONNECT. THERE ARE SOME WHO HAVE CHOSEN TO CONNECT, AND THERE ARE THOSE WHO HAVE NOT. [04:05:02] BUT WE WILL NOT STOP WORKING ON THE DELIVERY OF THIS PROGRAM. BECAUSE THERE'S ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT THAT'S TAKING PLACE. ONCE THAT DEVELOPMENT IS DONE, WE WILL CONTINUE TO DO THE OUTREACH AS WE'VE MENTIONED. IF THERE ARE OTHER HOMEOWNERS THAT WANT TO THEN CONNECT, WE WILL FIND THE ADDITIONAL FUNDING TO BE ABLE TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY HAVE THAT CONNECTION AVAILABLE TO THEM. SO AGAIN, THIS WAS A PROGRAM. WE'VE NEVER DONE ANYTHING LIKE THIS BEFORE. AND COUNCILWOMAN MENDELSOHN IS ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. THIS WAS DONE IN THE SPIRIT OF HOW DO WE SCALE UP INFRASTRUCTURE IN CERTAIN PARTS OF OUR CITY, AND MAKING SURE THAT AREAS THAT WE'VE HAD UNDERINVESTMENT, THAT WE'RE ABLE TO CONTINUE THAT WORK. BUT THIS WILL NOT STOP US FROM CONTINUING DOWN THAT PATH OF MAKING THIS PROGRAM AVAILABLE TO THOSE RESIDENTS WHO CHOOSE TO PARTICIPATE. THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON. YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT NUMBER FIVE. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. CITY MANAGER, I HAVE A QUESTION. I GUESS I COULD ASK YOU. I HEARD IT EARLIER, SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE. BECAUSE LIBRARIES ARE IMPORTANT. IS THERE WAS THERE A BUILT A BRAND NEW LIBRARY? ONE ONE MILE. IS IT ONE AND A HALF MILE? TWO MILES? YES, SIR. THERE IS THAT LIBRARY. I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT DATE WHEN IT WAS OPENED. I THINK IT WAS IN THE LAST I THINK IT WAS IN THE LAST 4 TO 5 YEARS. BUT I'LL HAVE THE LIBRARY DIRECTOR. YES. THANK YOU FOR THAT. CITY MANAGER. COUNCIL MEMBER. IT WAS, I BELIEVE, OPENED IN 2021, ALTHOUGH IT WAS READY TO BE FULLY OPENED, I BELIEVE IN 2020. BUT I WILL VALIDATE THAT FOR YOU. BUT I THINK COVID GOT IN THE WAY A LITTLE BIT WITH THE RIBBON CUTTING, BUT IT WAS EITHER 2020 OR 2021. IT IS QUITE NEW. I FORGOT ABOUT COVID. I DON'T KNOW HOW I FORGOT ABOUT COVID. YEAH, SO THE ANSWER IS YES. THERE IS. I THINK YOUR YOUR QUESTION WAS IS THERE A NEARBY NEWER LIBRARY? THE ANSWER IS YES. A NEWER LIBRARY JUST ONE MILE AROUND THE CORNER. IS IT AROUND THE CORNER? IS IT REALLY A MILE? IT'S IT'S WITHIN TWO MILES. SO ABOUT TEN MINUTES. 5 OR 10 MINUTES AWAY. YEAH. IT'S IT'S A IT'S A QUICK DRIVE. I WILL ALSO SAY AND WE DON'T COUNT THIS IN OUR CALCULATIONS, BUT WE HAVE ANOTHER LIBRARY THAT'S CLOSE BY INSIDE THE NORTH PARK CENTER CALLED BOOKMARKS. THAT'S A CHILDREN'S LIBRARY. AND IT REALLY TAKES INTENTIONALITY BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO GO INSIDE THE MALL. BUT IF YOU'RE REALLY LOOKING AT THE CAMPUS, WE HAVE THREE LIBRARIES THAT ARE QUITE CLOSE TOGETHER. NOW, INSIDE THE MALL IS DIFFERENT FROM WHAT THAT THAT'S DIFFERENT FROM MY IN MY OPINION. BUT THE ONE THAT WAS BUILT IS A PUBLIC LIBRARY, CORRECT? CORRECT. YES. OKAY. AND IT'S ONE MILE FROM THE OTHER. THE OLDER LIBRARY, IT'S LESS THAN TWO. LESS THAN WHAT I CAN SAY. I SAY LESS THAN TWO. CORRECT. OKAY. THAT'S WHY I WAS TRYING TO GET. THANK YOU SO MUCH. YES. THANK YOU. STEWART YOU RECOGNIZE FOR CHAIRWOMAN STEWART, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES AMENDMENT NUMBER FIVE. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. SO I'M STRUGGLING WITH THIS ONE BECAUSE I AM A HUGE SUPPORTER OF LIBRARIES AND FEEL LIKE A LIBRARY IN A NEIGHBORHOOD, AT LEAST IN MY EXPERIENCE. IT'S LIKE HAVING A PIECE OF CITY HALL THERE. IT'S IT'S HOW. IT'S WHAT CONNECTS YOU TO THE CITY. IN A LOT OF WAYS. IT'S WHERE YOU VOTE. IT'S WHERE YOU I'VE BEEN TO, YOU KNOW, LOTS OF COMMUNITY MEETINGS AND TOWN HALL MEETINGS. AND SO IT'S HARD TO CLOSE ONE. IT'S REALLY HARD. SO AND IT WAS HARD THIS TIME LAST YEAR WE HAD THESE VERY SIMILAR DISCUSSIONS AND WE POINTED TO VICKERY MEADOW AND THAT LIBRARY. AND THAT'S AN AMAZING LIBRARY, A MUCH, MUCH NEEDED LIBRARY, AND A LIBRARY THAT'S BRINGING TREMENDOUS RESOURCES TO THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. THAT NEIGHBORHOOD IS UNIQUE, AND I'M NOT GOING TO DESCRIBE IT IN THIS SETTING, BUT IT IS UNIQUE. AND AND THAT LIBRARY IS FILLING THE NEEDS OF THAT COMMUNITY. I JUST BECAUSE IT'S ONLY A MILE FROM SKILLMAN SOUTHWESTERN, DOESN'T MEAN IN SOME WAYS THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS ARE WORLDS APART. I'LL JUST SAY THAT. BUT SO LAST YEAR, MY UNDERSTANDING WAS WE NEED ONE MORE YEAR TO GET OUR NUMBERS UP, TO GET THINGS BETTER TO TO MAYBE FIND SOME MORE FUNDING. WE JUST NEED ANOTHER YEAR. WHEN WE WERE MAKING THE DECISION ABOUT WHETHER TO CLOSE SKILLMAN SOUTHWESTERN LAST YEAR, AND I THINK WE GOT BEHIND IT AND WE SAID, LET'S GIVE IT ONE MORE YEAR. SO I NEED TO REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT'S HAPPENING THIS UPCOMING YEAR. WHAT IS OUR FOCUS? WHERE WHERE ARE WE GOING WITH THIS? AND DO WE THINK WE CAN MAKE SOME CHANGES OR DECISIONS OR INROADS SOMEHOW SO THAT WE'RE NOT CONTINUING THIS CONVERSATION IN A YEAR? THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT QUESTION. AND I DO APPRECIATE THE THE STRATEGIC FOCUS AROUND WHAT DOES WHAT WILL THIS LOOK LIKE GOING FORWARD? WHICH IS THE REASON WHY IN THIS PROPOSED BUDGET PRESENTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL, WE DID NOT RECOMMEND ANY ADDITIONAL CLOSURES. THE FUNDING THAT WAS PUT IN PLACE LAST YEAR WAS ONE TIME FUNDING, AS YOU RECALL, AND WE LAID OUT THE OPPORTUNITY NOW TO BEGIN THE [04:10:06] WORK IN THIS UPCOMING YEAR TO DO A A FOCUS AROUND A MORE SUSTAINABLE LIBRARY SYSTEM WITH A REGIONAL FOCUS. THAT'S WHERE WE'RE HEADED. WE WANT THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO THE WORK. AND THAT'S WHY I CONTINUE TO SAY THAT DECISIONS AROUND WHAT THAT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE ARE YET TO BE DETERMINED. WE DO KNOW THAT OTHER CITIES AROUND THE COUNTRY HAVE ALREADY BEGUN TO MAKE THAT SHIFT BECAUSE THE THE WORLD OF THE LIBRARY SYSTEMS HAS CHANGED AND WE ARE BEHIND. AND SO I THINK WE HAVE TO FACE THE REALITY THAT THE WAY PEOPLE ACCESS INFORMATION AND USE OF LIBRARIES IS MUCH DIFFERENT THAN THE WAY THAT IT WAS EVEN PRIOR TO THE PANDEMIC. AND SO WE WANT THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO THE WORK. WE UNDERSTAND THAT BECAUSE OF THE CONVERSATION AROUND, THIS PARTICULAR LIBRARY MIGHT END UP BEING A PART OF WHAT THAT REGIONAL MODEL WILL LOOK LIKE. COULD CLOSE, COULD NOT. I DON'T HAVE THE ANSWER TODAY, BUT I THINK WHAT WE'VE SAID THROUGH THE BUDGET VERY CLEARLY, IS THAT WE NEED TIME TO DO THE WORK AND BRING BACK THROUGH THE CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE PROCESS CRITERIA, OBJECTIVE CRITERIA NOT BASED ON ANY PARTICULAR I WOULD SAY SUBJECTIVE CRITERIA. WE WE NEED TO USE THE DATA. WE NEED TO GIVE OUR NEW LIBRARY DIRECTOR AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT BEST PRACTICES. THIS REGIONAL MODEL, I DO BELIEVE, WILL GIVE US LONG TERM VALUE FOR OUR ENTIRE SYSTEM, WE HAVE BEEN HITTING AND MISSING BECAUSE EVERY TIME WE GET INTO THESE BUDGET CONVERSATIONS OVER THE YEARS, AND I THINK THE DATA SHOWED IS THAT ALL WE'VE DONE IS REDUCED HOURS AND WE REDUCED NUMBERS OF DAYS, AND THAT IS NOT SOMETHING WE CAN SUSTAIN. SO THE STRATEGY GOING FORWARD IS TO COME BACK TO THIS BODY AND WORK ON A BETTER MODEL FOR THE FUTURE THAT WE CAN ALL BE PROUD OF. AND THIS LIBRARY NEEDS TO STAY IN THE SYSTEM NOW. SO SO THAT IT CAN BE PART OF THAT DISCUSSION, PART OF THAT PLANNING. I THINK THIS CITY COUNCIL MEMBER WHO REPRESENTS THIS DISTRICT QUITE WELL AND HAS HEARD FROM THE RESIDENTS OF THAT DISTRICT BOTH LAST YEAR AND THIS YEAR, AND THIS AMENDMENT THAT HAS BEEN PUT FORTH IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO LET THE REGIONAL MODEL WORK ADVANCE THAT WORK AND THEN COME BACK AND SEE EXACTLY WHERE WE ARE. AND I THINK THAT THAT'S WHAT WITHOUT ME SPEAKING FOR THE COUNCIL MEMBER, I THINK THAT'S WHAT'S BEING REQUESTED. OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. CHAIRMAN WEST. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT NUMBER FIVE. THANK YOU. MAYOR. CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, SIR. GREAT. THANK YOU. SO I'M REALLY GLAD THAT CITY MANAGER MENTIONED THAT. MENTIONED THE REAL ESTATE MASTER PLAN. YOU KNOW, GBFM WORKED ON THAT THROUGH A LOT OF REAL ESTATE DISCUSSIONS IN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS. WE'RE CALLING FOR THE MASTER PLAN. AND I KNOW THAT MR. GIBSON AND MISS TOLBERT SUPPORTED IT FROM THE GET GO. AND I APPRECIATE THAT. AND I THINK WHEN WHEN IT'S FINISHED, WE'RE GOING TO AVOID A LOT OF THESE PROTRACTED DISCUSSIONS ABOUT, YOU KNOW, IF WE'RE USING A REAL ESTATE ADEQUATELY OR NOT. LIKE CHAIR STEWART JUST SAID WE NEED TO HAVE A STRATEGIC FOCUS AND TAKE THE GUESSWORK OUT OF IT, BECAUSE OTHERWISE WE'RE GOING TO ALWAYS BE FIGHTING FOR OUR ASSETS, AND OUR RESIDENTS EXPECT THAT OF US. SO IT'S TOTALLY TO BE EXPECTED. I AM GOING TO SUPPORT THE AMENDMENT OVERALL BASED ON THE DISCUSSION I'VE HEARD SO FAR. ON THE USE OF FUNDS, YOU KNOW, LIKE MY COLLEAGUE FROM FAR NORTH, DALLAS, I DO REMEMBER VERY WELL, MAYOR PRO TEM ATKINS TALKING ABOUT THE NEED FOR THE SEWER CONNECTIONS. AND AS MISS TOLBERT MENTIONED, WE TRIED THE PROGRAM. WE TRIED TO DO IT USING ARPA FUNDS. IT'S NOT GAINING MOMENTUM. SO WE NEED TO SHIFT THOSE ARPA FUNDS TO SOMETHING ELSE FOR NOW, AND THEN TRY TO FIGURE OUT A BETTER WAY TO GET THOSE CONNECTIONS DONE IN THE FUTURE. GET THE COMMUNITY ON BOARD. I'M GOING TO ASK A QUESTION FOR JACK OR SOMEONE ON THE TEAM. IF WE DON'T USE ARPA FUNDS IN A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME, THEY DO EXPIRE, RIGHT? WE HAVE TO GIVE THEM BACK. SO REGARDING ARPA FUNDS, THERE ARE SOME ARPA FUNDS THAT ARE STILL IN THE ORIGINAL GRANT FUND WITH A DECEMBER 31ST 26 DEADLINE, AND IF THOSE FUNDS ARE NOT REALLOCATED OR SPENT BY THAT DEADLINE, THEY DO HAVE TO BE RETURNED. BUT WE DID REALLOCATE THESE PARTICULAR FUNDS AND SET THEM UP SO THAT THEY DON'T HAVE THE HUD, THE FEDERAL REGULATIONS. BUT IT'S STILL OUR GOAL TO SPEND BY DECEMBER 31ST OF 26. OKAY. I WANT TO TURN TO THE LIBRARY FOR A MINUTE. [04:15:01] WHILE THE DISCUSSION WAS GOING ON, I WAS USING GOOGLE MAPS AND JUST KIND OF I'VE BEEN TO THIS LIBRARY, BUT I WASN'T SURE HOW IT RELATED TO THE VICKERY MEADOW LIBRARY. SO I DID SEE THAT IT IS ABOUT A MILE AWAY AS THE CROW FLIES, WHICH I DON'T THINK ANY OF OUR RESIDENTS ARE TAKING HELICOPTERS YET. OR AIR TAXIS. WE'RE NOT QUITE THERE YET. SO THEY'RE DRIVING THERE, WHICH IS STILL NOT THAT FAR. BUT IF THEY'RE WALKING THERE IT LOOKS LIKE FROM A WALKERS PERSPECTIVE, IT IS A 30 MINUTE WALK FROM ONE LIBRARY TO THE OTHER AND YOU HAVE TO CROSS, I BELIEVE, NORTHWEST HIGHWAY. IS THAT RIGHT? I'LL ASK MISS BLACKMON THAT SINCE IT'S HER DISTRICT, YOU CAN HAVE MY TIME. NOT HEARING ANYBODY. SO, COUNCIL MEMBER, THIS IS JACK. I DO BELIEVE IT'S A CROSSING NORTHWEST HIGHWAY TO GET TO THE VICKERY MEADOW. VICKERY BRANCH. I'M SORRY. SOMEBODY WAS ASKING ME A QUESTION. HE WANTS TO KNOW IF YOU HAVE TO CROSS. OH, YEAH. IT'S A SIX LANE STATE HIGHWAY THAT I HAVE TO REPORT EVERY TIME THAT THERE IS. IT'S. IT'S A FAST THOROUGHFARE. YES. IT'S A MILE AS THE CROW FLIES. 30 MINUTE WALK IF YOU DO THE GOOGLE MAP. 19 MINUTE IF YOU DO DART, FIVE MINUTES IF YOU DRIVE, IT'S THERE'S NO YOU CAN CROSS A BRIDGE, BUT THERE'S NO PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY. IT'S A BOUNDARY. NORTHWEST HIGHWAY IS A BOUNDARY IN EAST DALLAS. IT'S LIKE A MOAT. YEAH. AND IT'S THE LIBRARY. AND THIS IS FOR STAFF OR COUNCILWOMAN. BLACKMON. YOU CAN ANSWER THIS IF YOU'D LIKE. IT ALSO BORDERS THE VILLAGE APARTMENTS, WHERE THERE'S LIKE 11,000 RESIDENTS WHO ARE RENTERS RIGHT NEXT DOOR. RIGHT? CORRECT. PLUS, THERE'S A ANOTHER CATTY CORNER APARTMENT COMPLEX, THE MEDALLION SHOPPING CENTER. AND THEN YOU HAVE ANOTHER NEIGHBORHOODS, AND THEN YOU HAVE LOVER'S LANE WITH A LOT OF OTHER THAT THAT IS ALSO TOO HAS LOTS OF RENTAL AND APARTMENTS. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. YEAH. I MEAN, WE'VE GOT A WE'VE GOT TO FIND CUTS. WE'VE GOT TO USE OUR REAL ESTATE WISELY. TO ME, LIBRARIES ARE A FUNDAMENTAL FOCUS OF THE CITY. IT IT IS A COST. AN EXPENSE. JUST LIKE OUR PARKS DON'T ALL MAKE US MONEY. OUR PUBLIC SAFETY ENTITIES DON'T MAKE US MONEY. WE CAN'T EXPECT EVERY ENTITY IN THE CITY TO MAKE US MONEY. AND WITHOUT A STRATEGIC PLAN IN PLACE, MASTER PLAN TELLING US THAT THIS LIBRARY, YOU KNOW, SHOULD BE USED IN A CERTAIN WAY. I JUST DON'T SUPPORT CUTTING IT AT THIS TIME. I THINK IT DESERVES ANOTHER YEAR TO GET THROUGH THE PROCESS. THAT'S IT. THANK YOU. MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT NUMBER FIVE. THANK YOU. MAYOR THIS FEELS LIKE DEJA VU FROM LAST YEAR. AGREE. THIS IS A DIFFICULT DECISION. MY FAMILY AND I ARE BIG USERS OF OUR LIBRARY. MY DISTRICT OFFICE IS INSIDE OF A LIBRARY, SO I UNDERSTAND HOW CRITICAL THE ROLE OF LIBRARIES ARE. I FIRST WANT TO TALK ABOUT. AND I THINK CITY MANAGER, THIS IS FOR YOU. YOU MENTIONED THAT THERE IS ABOUT 47 AREAS THAT WERE IDENTIFIED FOR FOR THE USE. CAN YOU GEOGRAPHICALLY TELL ME WHERE THOSE AREAS ARE? WHAT PART OF THE CITY? I KNOW THAT THE MAJORITY OF THOSE AREAS THAT WHAT WE CALLED UNSERVED AREAS, WERE IN THE SOUTHERN PART OF THE CITY. I DON'T HAVE A MAP IN FRONT OF ME, BUT I MIGHT HAVE. I MEAN, I'M LOOKING AROUND. OKAY. NOBODY'S LOOKING AT ME. BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT THE MAJORITY OF THOSE AREAS ARE IN THE SOUTHERN PART OF THE CITY. THANK YOU. I KNOW THAT MAYOR PRO TEM ATKINS FOUGHT HARD FOR THESE DOLLARS TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR RESIDENTS WERE CONNECTED. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT SOME RESIDENTS ARE NOT TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE OPPORTUNITY. SO I WOULD CHALLENGE OUR STAFF TO FIND OUT WHY WE'RE NOT MAKING THOSE CONNECTIONS. IS IT A FEAR OF GENTRIFICATION? IS IT A CONCERN OF ENCROACHMENT? AND SO I WOULD CHALLENGE OUR STAFF TO GO BACK TO THESE RESIDENTS AND TELL THAT STORY OF WHY IT COULD BE BENEFICIAL FOR THEM. SO THEY IF THEY CHOOSE TO CONNECT TO TO OUR WATER LINES. NEXT QUESTION THAT I HAVE IS FOR THE AND I'M NOT SURE IF IT'S FOR OUR LIBRARY DIRECTOR OR FOR FACILITIES. WE WENT DOWN A LIST OF DIFFERENT COSTS. I WANT TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT OPERATIONAL COSTS. SO MAINTENANCE. THE HVAC WAS OUT A COUPLE DAYS AGO. AND SO DO THOSE EXPENSES GO IN THE CURRENT BUDGET OR WOULD THEY GO THROUGH FACILITIES? [04:20:02] THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION, MAYOR PRO TEM DONZELL GIBSON, CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE. WE DON'T ACTUALLY FUND BY FACILITY FOR THOSE TYPES OF MAINTENANCE AND REPAIRS TO THE, YOU KNOW, HVAC GO OUT OR THERE'S SOME FLOORING ISSUE OR SOME OTHER MAINTENANCE ISSUE THAT COMES UP. WE ACTUALLY USE IT BASED ON WORK ORDERS, PEOPLE SUBMITTING REQUESTS BASED ON THINGS THAT HAVE PHYSICALLY HAPPENED AT THE BUILDING, AND THEN WE RESPOND ACCORDINGLY. WE TRY TO KEEP, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER WE HAVE WITHIN THE BUDGET BOUNDARIES THAT WE HAVE. THAT'S WHY WE'RE SO GRATEFUL THAT COUNCIL HAS GIVEN US ADDITIONAL MONEY THIS CYCLE, ALONG WITH THE PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE MONEY THAT THE CITY MANAGER REALLY EMPHASIZED IN THIS YEAR'S BUDGET AS WELL. SO SO WHAT'S THE BUDGET SOURCE FOR A WORK ORDER? SO IF IT'S A REGULAR WORK ORDER, LIKE FORGIVE ME, I SAY THIS, BUT SOMEONE BROKE A WINDOW. RIGHT. THAT WOULD BE THE REGULAR OPERATING BUDGET. IF IT'S A REAL CAPITAL RELATED EXPENSE, HVAC OR CHILLER OR SOME SOMETHING SYSTEM RELATED IN THE BUILDING, RIGHT? IT'S INTEGRAL TO THE STRUCTURE OF THE BUILDING. THEN IT WOULD BE A CAPITAL EXPENSE THAT WOULD COME FROM THE CAPITAL BUDGET. OKAY. THANK YOU. NEXT QUESTION IS FOR LIBRARY DIRECTOR. WE TALKED A LOT ABOUT HOURS AND THE WE'VE CHANGED OUR HOURS. HOW MANY TIMES? THE PAST FIVE YEARS. THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION, COUNCIL MEMBER. WE HAVE CHANGED OUR HOURS EIGHT TIMES IN THE LAST 15 YEARS. OKAY. CAN YOU TELL ME A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THIS? WOULD REDUCE THE HOURS TO 24 HOURS. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT STAFF FOR THE LIBRARY'S FULL TIME STAFF ONLY, AND THAT WE DON'T HAVE PART TIME STAFF. SO HOW WOULD IF THIS PROPOSAL WERE TO GO THROUGH, HOW WERE HOURS AND SHIFTS BE DIVIDED UP BETWEEN FOR THIS PARTICULAR BRANCH? YES. MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU ARE CORRECT. WE ONLY HAVE FULL TIME STAFF AT THE LIBRARY, WHICH IS NOT THE LONG TERM GOAL. MY LONG TERM GOAL IS TO HAVE A CADRE OF PART TIME STAFF. WE JUST HAVEN'T HAD THE SPACE OR THE TIME TO FIGURE OUT EXACTLY HOW TO DO THAT. I ASSUME IT'S THROUGH ATTRITION, BUT IN THE MEANTIME, WE ARE ALL FULL TIME STAFF, WHICH MEANS THAT WE ARE LIMITED ON HOW FAR DOWN IN STAFF WE CAN GO IN AND MAINTAIN THE 24 HOURS A WEEK. SO THAT'S WHY WE HAVE A FULL TIME MANAGER, TWO FULL TIME PUBLIC SERVICE STAFF AND THREE CIRCULATION STAFF WOULDN'T NORMALLY HAVE THAT MANY PEOPLE FOR 24 HOURS, BUT BECAUSE WE ONLY HAVE FULL TIME STAFF SO THEY'LL SOME OF THE STAFF WILL WORK AT SKILLMAN SOUTHWESTERN THREE DAYS A WEEK, AND THEN THEY WILL WORK AT OTHER LOCATIONS TWO DAYS A WEEK. OKAY. AND JACK, I THINK THIS ONE IS FOR YOU. HOW MUCH FLEXIBILITY DO WE HAVE WITH THE CURRENT SOURCE OF FUNDS FOR OTHER USES THAT COULD GO TOWARDS THE 47 AREAS THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED? SO HOW COULD COULD THOSE DOLLARS BE REPROGRAMED TO SERVE THOSE COMMUNITIES? YES, SIR. THESE ARPA DOLLARS ARE IN WHAT WE REFER TO AS THE REDEVELOPMENT FUND, WHICH MEANS THEY'RE BASICALLY LIKE GENERAL FUND DOLLARS. SO THINGS THAT WOULD BE ELIGIBLE FOR GENERAL FUND USE IS HOW YOU CAN USE THESE DOLLARS. THANK YOU. MAYOR. MR. ROTH, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT NUMBER FIVE. THANK YOU. HOW BIG IS THAT BUILDING? I WENT BY THERE THE OTHER DAY, AND IT'S IT'S IT'S A RELATIVELY SMALL BUILDING, ISN'T IT? I'M SORRY, COUNCIL MEMBER. I DO NOT HAVE JUST ROUGHLY. JUST ROUGHLY. I DON'T KNOW, ROUGHLY. I'M SO SORRY. I DO NOT HAVE THE SQUARE. IT'S PROBABLY ABOUT ON A HALF ACRE. IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S MAYBE FIVE, 6000FT. IT'S. I DON'T HAVE THE SQUARE FOOTAGE IN FRONT OF ME. WHAT I WILL TELL YOU IS THAT IT'S SMALL BECAUSE OF THE FOOTPRINT OF THE LAND ITSELF. AND IT IS ODDLY SHAPED. IT'S NOT WIDE OPEN LIKE WE WOULD BUILD A MODERN LIBRARY. RIGHT. AND SO THE COST OF OPERATIONS FOR THAT BUILDING WOULD PROBABLY BE SOMEWHERE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF $50,000, I WOULD IMAGINE IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT UTILITIES, JANITORIAL. IF IT WASN'T CITY SERVICES GIVE OR TAKE. WOULD THAT BE A REASONABLE ESTIMATE? AND THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE ANY TAXES. I'M SORRY. YOU'RE ASKING FOR THE COST OF UTILITIES, OF OPERATIONS, OF THE BUILDING TO KEEP IT UP AND RUNNING IN ITS WITH ITS CURRENT OR AS A BUILDING, JUST AS A BUILDING. IF IT WAS VACANT, WE'D STILL HAVE TO PAY. WE'D STILL HAVE TO HAVE LIGHTS ON. WE STILL HAVE TO HAVE WATER ON. WE STILL HAVE TO HAVE IT CLEAN WITHOUT THE LANDSCAPE. THANK YOU. I'M GOING TO HAVE TO ASK FACILITIES TO HELP IDENTIFY RESPONSE. YES, AND I'M SORRY. COUNCIL MEMBER. IT IS 13,000FT² INSIDE THE BUILDING, SO IT'S EVEN MORE. OKAY. GOOD AFTERNOON, JOHN JOHNSON. YES, SIR. WE WOULD. EVEN IF THE BUILDING WAS NO LONGER IN USE OR DECLARED SURPLUS, WE WOULD HAVE TO SECURE IT. WE WOULD KEEP THE UTILITIES ON FOR SHOWINGS UNTIL IT WAS SOLD AND THE DEED WAS TRANSFERRED TO SOMEONE ELSE. [04:25:03] AND SO OUT OF THE. AND THEN SO THAT WOULD, LET'S SAY 15,000FT, JUST GIVE OR TAKE, YOU'RE PROBABLY LOOKING AT ANOTHER $100,000 OF THIS COST THEN, IS OPERATIONS IF ROUGHLY JUST GIVEN. AND YOU'RE SAYING THAT THE STAFF THAT'S THERE WOULD BE RELOCATED OR COULD BE UTILIZED AT OTHER FACILITIES? SORRY. SORRY TO KEEP PULLING YOU BACK. I'M SORRY. WOULD YOU REPEAT YOUR QUESTION? THE STAFF THAT'S THERE IS IS WOULD ANTICIPATED TO BE RELOCATED OR TO BE UTILIZED AT OTHER FACILITIES IF THE AMENDMENT PASSES OR IF THE LIBRARY IF THIS PLACE WAS CLOSED. I MEAN, IF YOU WEREN'T USING THE O, THOSE POSITIONS ARE BEING ELIMINATED. THEY WOULD BE ELIMINATED. CORRECT. YES. THAT'S WHERE THE THE SAVINGS IS WITH THE WITH THE CLOSURE OF THE LIBRARY. WE ARE PREDOMINANTLY PEOPLE IN THE LIBRARY SYSTEM. SO IN ORDER TO REALIZE SAVINGS, WE HAVE TO ELIMINATE POSITIONS. OKAY. AND TO THE TO REAL IS TO. IF THIS PROPERTY WAS PUT ON THE MARKET AS A AN INCOME PRODUCING PROPERTY ON BEHALF OF THE CITY, WE WOULD THEN BE ABLE TO UTILIZE AND RECEIVE POSSIBLY TAX REVENUE AND, AND OTHER AND ALSO REDUCE OUR, OUR OUT OF POCKET EXPENSES. YES, SIR. AS MENTIONED IF IT IS, IF THE PROPERTY IS SOLD FOR PRIVATE USE, THEN THERE WOULD BE PROPERTY TAX COLLECTED. DEPENDING UPON WHAT THE USE IS, THERE MAY BE SALES TAX COLLECTED AS WELL. THAT WOULD THEN BENEFIT THE THE GENERAL FUND OF THE CITY. PROCEEDS FROM THE SALE OF A PROPERTY GO INTO OUR MAJOR MAINTENANCE FUND, WHICH ALLOWS US TO DO HVACS OR ROOFS AT OTHER FACILITIES. THANK YOU. MISS. MISS BLAIR, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. YES. THIS THESE FUNDS EXPIRED. IS THAT NOT CORRECT? IN 2026? SOME OF THESE FUNDS EXPIRE IN 2026 FOR. YES, MA'AM. THAT IS CORRECT. AND WE WERE TOLD THAT UTILITIES THEY STAY ON UNTIL THE BUILDING IS RESOLD. IS THAT CORRECT? YES, THAT WAS THE ANSWER FROM FACILITIES. SO THE DEADLINE FOR EXPENDITURES IS DECEMBER 31ST, 2026. SO NOT IN THE EARLY PART OF 26, BUT IN THE LATTER PART OF 2026. YES, MA'AM. SO BUT WE DO HAVE. HOW DO I SAY THIS? WE DO HAVE FACILITIES THAT WE DON'T USE THE SAME TYPE OF MODEL OF MAINTENANCE THAT HAVE BEEN DECOMMISSIONED. IS THAT NOT CORRECT? DONZELL GIBSON CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE. I'M NOT REALLY SURE HOW TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION. CAN YOU CAN YOU RESTATE THAT? IT SOUNDED AS IF YOU SUGGESTED THAT BECAUSE WE USE THESE BUILDINGS DIFFERENTLY, RIGHT. THAT OKAY. COULD YOU. WHAT I'M SAYING IS THERE HAVE BEEN OCCASIONS AND OCCURRENCES WHERE WE THAT THAT THE, THE DECOMMISSIONED BUILDINGS WE DON'T NECESSARILY ALWAYS LEAVE THE, THE, THE UTILITIES COMPLETELY ON. SOMETIMES WE WILL KIND OF ADJUST THEM AS THE NEEDS OF THE COMMUNITY. I'M GOING TO LET ME TRY TO SEE IF I CAN HELP, BECAUSE MY VERY ABLE BODIED ACM IS PROBABLY CONFUSED LIKE I AM. SO WILL YOU WILL YOU RESTATE THE QUESTION, PLEASE? WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY IS THE THE UTILITIES AREN'T FAIRLY BECAUSE THERE ARE NO LONGER OCCUPIED TO AT 100%. THE, THE, THE, THE BILLS THAT WE PAY FOR THOSE UTILITIES AREN'T AT THE SAME LEVEL AS WHEN THEY'RE OCCUPIED AT 100%. THAT COULD BE THE CASE, BUT IT'S GOING TO BE BUILDING BY BUILDING. I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE UNIQUE TO WHATEVER THAT SIZE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THAT BUILDING IS. IT WILL BE DIFFERENT. THEN WE WHEN, WHEN FOR THIS PARTICULAR THE FUNDING SOURCE FOR THIS PARTICULAR USE. I'M JUST GETTING CLARIFICATION. YOU DID SAY THAT YOU WERE LOOKING FOR DIFFERENT OPPORTUNITIES TO CONTINUE PROVIDING DISTRICT EIGHT RESIDENTS THE OPPORTUNITY TO CONNECT TO WATER, TO SEWER LINES UNDER A DIFFERENT PROGRAM SINCE THESE THIS PROGRAM EXPIRES [04:30:03] IN 2026. CORRECT. SO LET ME LET ME GO BACK. THIS PROGRAM, WHEN IT WAS LAID OUT, IDENTIFIED ABOUT 47 DIFFERENT AREAS. THOSE AREAS ARE WITHIN DISTRICT EIGHT. THERE'S A FEW IN DISTRICT THREE AND DISTRICT 12. OKAY. THAT'S THE TOTAL OF THE 47. WHAT I MENTIONED IS THAT BECAUSE THIS IS NEW, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE ROLLED OUT USING THE ARPA FUNDS FOR THIS PROGRAM. WE'VE DONE WORK IN THE AREAS WHERE WE'VE COMPLETED THE, THE, THE, THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE WATER AND WASTEWATER LINES. WE'VE DONE OUTREACH IN THOSE AREAS WHERE IT'S BEEN COMPLETED OF ABOUT 200 DIFFERENT RESIDENTS. WE'VE HAD 23 TO ACCEPT THE PROGRAM. HOWEVER, WE HAVE OTHER AREAS THAT WE'RE STILL FINISHING THE WORK. IT'S NOT DONE YET. WE WILL CONTINUE TO DO THE OUTREACH AND ANY OF THOSE RESIDENTS WHO WOULD LIKE TO THEN CONNECT. ONCE THAT WORK IS DONE, WE WOULD CONTINUE WITH THE PROGRAM. WE WOULD JUST IDENTIFY THE FUNDING, EITHER THROUGH THE BUDGET PROCESS, TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S AVAILABLE TO THOSE WHO WANT TO CONNECT. BUT AGAIN, THE PROGRAM HAS MOVED SLOWLY, AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE NUMBER THAT WE HAVE PARTICIPATING. BUT WE'RE NOT LOSING FOCUS ON WHAT THE INTENDED GOAL WAS. AS I MENTIONED, THIS IS A VOLUNTARY PROGRAM. IT'S NOT A PROGRAM THAT WE CAN MANDATE HOMEOWNERS TO PARTICIPATE IN, BUT WE WILL DEFINITELY CONTINUE TO DO THE OUTREACH. I'VE HEARD EVEN MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO MENTIONED HOW WE SHOULD CONTINUE TO EXPLAIN THE BENEFITS, MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE OUT THERE DOING THE WORK AND WE'RE ANSWERING QUESTIONS. WE WILL CONTINUE TO DO THAT EVEN GOING INTO THIS UPCOMING BUDGET. WHATEVER DECISION COUNCIL MAKES ABOUT THE USE OF THE FUNDS, WE WILL STILL DO THE WORK WITHIN THOSE 47 AREAS. THANK YOU. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. IT'S AMENDMENT NUMBER FIVE. THANK YOU. I THINK I NEED AN EXPLANATION OR CORRECTION. YOU JUST SAID THAT THE FUNDS WILL EXPIRE, BUT WE ALSO HAD ESTABLISHED EARLIER THAT THE FUNDS WON'T EXPIRE. CAN YOU CLARIFY? SO IT IS OUR INTENT TO GET ALL OF THE ARPA FUNDS, WHETHER THEY WERE ORIGINAL ARPA FUNDS OR REDEVELOPMENT FUNDS SPENT BY DECEMBER 31ST, 26. AND SO WE'RE INTENT ON THAT. WE'RE MOVING FORWARD WITH THAT. THAT IS THE DIRECTION TO THE DEPARTMENTS. ONLY THE TRUE ARPA FUNDS WOULD HAVE TO BE RETURNED TO THE US TREASURY IF NOT EXPENDED BY THAT DATE. SO THIS IS A CITY GOAL, NOT A FEDERAL REQUIREMENT. IT IS THE DIRECTION OF MY BOSS, THE CITY MANAGER. SO IT'S A CITY GOAL, NOT A FEDERAL REQUIREMENT BECAUSE OF THE WAY WE HAVE. I WOULD USE THE WORD REPROGRAMED. THE GOAL WAS, AS COUNCIL WILL RECALL, WHEN WE LOOKED AT THE ARPA DOLLARS, WE WERE REALLY FOCUSED ON IMMEDIATE NEEDS, WAYS THAT WE COULD MAKE IMPROVEMENTS ACROSS THE VARIOUS COUNCIL DISTRICTS USING COUNCIL MEMBERS INPUT AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON THINGS THAT YOU WANTED TO SEE HAPPEN IN THE VARIOUS DISTRICTS. SO WE DEFINITELY WANTED TO CONTINUE WITH THAT COMMITMENT. BUT WE ALSO KNOW THAT WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY IF COUNCIL CHOOSES TO DO DIFFERENT THINGS WITH LINE ITEMS THAT WERE IDENTIFIED WITH ARPA DOLLARS, THEN WE WOULD ENSURE THAT WE SPEND THOSE AS QUICKLY AS WE CAN WITH THE USES THAT COUNCIL HAS IDENTIFIED, WHICH IS WHY I ALSO MENTIONED THE BALANCE THAT'S SITTING IN THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL OFFICE AS WELL. SO AGAIN, IT IS NOT A REQUIREMENT. IT'S A GOAL. IT IS A GOAL THAT WE MADE FROM A MANAGEMENT PERSPECTIVE. YES, MA'AM. I UNDERSTAND, BUT I THINK IT WAS STATED AS IF IT WAS A REQUIREMENT BECAUSE OF THE REPROGRAMING. WE ARE NOT WE WILL NOT BE OUT OF COMPLIANCE BECAUSE OF THE CHANGES THAT WE'VE ALREADY MADE TO REALLY TREAT THIS AS GENERAL FUND REDEVELOPMENT DOLLARS. SO BUT IT'S STILL OUR GOAL TO GET THE MONEY ON THE STREET. YOU VERY PUBLICLY HAVE TALKED ABOUT THE TOUGH BUDGET YEARS AHEAD. YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO ADD ANOTHER 20 MILLION FOR PENSION NEXT YEAR, MORE POLICE OFFICERS FOR NEXT YEAR. IF YOU EXPEND THIS MONEY ON SOMETHING OTHER THAN THE SEPTIC PROGRAM, WHERE DO YOU THINK YOU'RE GOING TO START A NEW SEPTIC PROGRAM? LIKE, WHERE WOULD THOSE FUNDS COME FROM? I THINK WITH ALL OF OUR BUDGET CHALLENGES THAT WE WILL FACE GOING FORWARD, IT'LL BE A PART OF OUR BUDGET PROCESS TO EITHER IDENTIFY NEW SOURCES, LOOK AT WAYS THAT WE CAN CONTINUE THE WORK THAT WE'VE DONE ACROSS THE ORGANIZATION, LOOKING AT WAYS THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO. I'M GOING TO USE THE WORD REIMAGINING, BECAUSE THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING OVER THIS LAST YEAR. IF COUNCIL MAKES A DECISION TO UTILIZE THESE FUNDS FOR THIS PURPOSE, AND THE SEPTIC PROGRAM IS A PROGRAM THAT COUNCIL WANTS US TO CONTINUE, THEN YOU WOULD BE ASKING ME TO IDENTIFY THE BEST WAY TO MAKE THOSE FUNDS AVAILABLE, AND I CAN'T GIVE YOU ALL THE WAYS THAT WE WOULD DO IT, BUT IT WOULD BE A, IT WOULD BE PRETTY MUCH YOU MAKING IT A PRIORITY AND GIVING ME THE RESPONSIBILITY TO IDENTIFY HOW TO DELIVER THAT FOR YOU. [04:35:01] NICELY SAID. EXCEPT I'M GOING TO I'M GOING TO BOIL IT DOWN. BASICALLY, YOU'RE GOING TO TRADE KEEPING A LIBRARY OPEN THAT IS SO OBVIOUSLY IN NEED OF CLOSURE, AND WE'RE GOING TO END UP CUTTING SOMEWHERE ELSE. THAT'S ACTUALLY WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. AND IF YOU THINK THAT IT'S HARD TO CUT A LIBRARY THAT IS ONE MILE AWAY FROM ANOTHER LIBRARY THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO CLOSE LAST YEAR, THAT'S ONLY GOING TO BE OPEN 24 HOURS A WEEK. AND IF THAT'S TOO HARD FOR US TO DO, WE ARE IN SERIOUS TROUBLE. AND HOW DO YOU THINK WE'RE GOING TO GET TO CLOSE FIVE LIBRARIES NEXT YEAR, WHEN THIS VERY OBVIOUS SITUATION ISN'T EVEN A SLAM DUNK? THERE WILL BE NO OTHER MONEY FOR THE SEPTIC PROGRAM. THAT'S WHY IN 15 YEARS, OUR FORMER COLLEAGUE TENNELL ATKINS DIDN'T GET THAT MONEY UNTIL COVID HAPPENED, UNTIL WE GOT THE ARPA MONEY, BECAUSE HE FINALLY FOUND A POT OF MONEY. AND WHEN THAT GOES AWAY, THERE IS NO MORE MONEY. SO IT WILL BE OTHER SIGNIFICANT CUTS. AND I PROBABLY WON'T BE ON COUNCIL WHEN IT COMES BACK. BUT I'M TELLING YOU, THAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN. IT'S INTERESTING THAT ONE OF THE RESIDENTS WHO LIVES NEARBY CAME TO THE TOWN HALL THAT COUNCILMEMBER ROTH AND I HAD, AND WHEN IT WAS ALL DONE, SHE SAYS, YOU KNOW, I KNOW YOU SUPPORT LIBRARIES. MY REAL CONCERN IS I DON'T WANT A HOMELESS ENCAMPMENT. AND SO I THINK YOU HEARD THE COUNCIL MEMBER EVEN ASKING ABOUT THAT. WE KNOW WE'VE HAD PROBLEMS. AND WHAT I'M LOOKING TO HEAR YOU SAY IS THERE'S A COMMITMENT TO MAKING SURE WE HAVE THE KIND OF SECURITY IN PLACE TO NOT ALLOW THAT TO HAPPEN TO ANY LOCATION WE CLOSE. NOT ONLY IS IT MY COMMITMENT, BUT WE'VE ALSO TALKED ABOUT MOVING FORWARD WITH PLANS TO ENSURE THAT AS WE LOOK AT THE WAY WE MONETIZE ASSETS, THAT WE CAN IMMEDIATELY MOVE INTO CREATING EITHER A REUSE WE DEEM THE PROPERTY SURPLUS, WE HAVE A BROKER ON SITE THAT MOVES THAT PROCESS FORWARD. AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE HEARD LOUD AND CLEAR. WE DID NOT WANT ANY OTHER SITUATIONS WHERE WE'VE TRIED TO MAINTAIN FACILITIES. THAT IS NOT THE BUSINESS THAT WE'VE DONE WELL AND WE KNOW THAT, WHICH IS WHY WE'VE WE'VE MOVED IN THE DIRECTION TO WHERE ONCE COUNCIL DETERMINES THAT SOMETHING IS SURPLUS, THAT WE THEN HAVE A PROCESS ON HOW WE MOVE FORWARD. AND THOSE FACILITIES ARE NOT SITTING THERE TO BECOME AN EYESORE IN ANY COMMUNITY OR ANY DISTRICT ACROSS THE CITY. SO THAT IS DEFINITELY A PRIORITY AND HOW WE WOULD PROCEED IF COUNCIL CHOOSES TO CLOSE THIS LIBRARY. THANK YOU. YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A VERY IMPORTANT FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY IN THE CITY. AND BECAUSE YOU GET A SMALL GROUP OF PEOPLE LOBBYING FOR ONE THING, DOESN'T MEAN IT'S THE RIGHT THING FOR OUR CITY. AND THAT'S THE THING. WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO MAKE THE TOUGH DECISIONS, AND NOT EVERYONE IS GOING TO LIKE ANY DECISION WE MAKE. AND WE NEED TO ASK OURSELVES TO PLEASE HAVE THE POLITICAL WILL TO DO WHAT'S BEST TO SET OURSELVES ON THE RIGHT COURSE FOR OUR FUTURE. SO WITH THAT, I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THE MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED BUDGET. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST AMENDMENT NUMBER FIVE AND TODAY'S AMENDMENT PACKAGE? SEEING NONE, PLEASE SIGNIFY YOUR SUPPORT FOR THIS AMENDMENT BY SHOWING YOUR CITY SEAL PLACARD. SEALS RAISED IN FAVOR. COUNCIL MEMBER CADENA STEWART BLACKMON. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM WILLIS COUNCIL MEMBER RESENDEZ. RIDLEY, GRACEY AND THE REMOTE PEOPLE AND COUNCIL MEMBER WEST AND COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA. I ONLY COUNT SEVEN RAISED IN FAVOR, MR. MAYOR. DO IT AGAIN JUST TO MAKE SURE. OKAY. WILL YOU PLEASE RAISE YOUR SEAL IN YOUR YOUR HANDS? SEALS RAISED IN FAVOR. COUNCIL MEMBER. OKAY. COUNCIL MEMBER. BLAIR. COUNCIL MEMBER CADENA. COUNCIL MEMBER. STEWART. COUNCIL MEMBER. BLACKMON. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM WILLIS COUNCIL MEMBER RESENDEZ COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY, COUNCIL MEMBER GRACEY COUNCIL MEMBER WEST AND COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA WITH TEN RAISED IN FAVOR. MR. MAYOR, THIS AMENDMENT MOVES FORWARD. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. NEXT PERSON WHO HASN'T? MISS WILLIS, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR A MOTION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. WE'LL HAVE DEJA VU. I'D LIKE TO MOVE THAT. WE APPROVE AMENDMENT SIX WITH A CHANGE OF SOURCE OF FUNDS FROM PHASE ONE. DALLAS BIKE PLAN ALLOCATION BY $400,000 TO ARPA SEPTIC TANK PROGRAM TO INCREASE FOR THE USE OF FUNDS, $400,000 TO EXPAND SPAY NEUTER PROGRAMS, MICROCHIPPING AND SHIPPING AND VACCINATION EFFORTS TO REDUCE SHELTER INTAKE, STRENGTHEN PUBLIC HEALTH, AND LOWER OPERATIONAL STRAIN. IS THERE A SECOND? I HEARD A SECOND. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES, IF YOU'D LIKE IT TO EXPLAIN YOUR AMENDMENT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MAYOR. AGAIN, SORRY FOR THE PUBLIC. THIS IS AMENDMENT NUMBER SIX IN YOUR PACKET. [04:40:03] THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND I KNOW THAT WE HAD SOME COMPELLING DISCUSSION WITH DAS DIRECTOR RAMONE HERE EARLIER, BUT I DID WANT TO GO BACK JUST FOR THE PUBLIC'S SAKE AND THINK ABOUT WHAT DAS DOES. AND, YOU KNOW, WE SEE THEY DO A GREAT JOB ON SOCIAL MEDIA. I THINK AS FAR AS SHOWING ANIMALS THAT ARE AVAILABLE FOR ADOPTION AND SHOWING THE WAY THAT THEY LINK PETS WITH THEIR NEW FAMILIES, THAT'S GREAT. BUT WE ALSO SEE SOCIAL MEDIA POSTS AROUND OVERCAPACITY, AND THAT'S BEEN GOING ON FOR YOU KNOW, WELL OVER A YEAR. AND IT'S REALLY HARD TO SEE THAT BECAUSE, THEY'RE TAKING IN SO MANY PETS, AND WHEN THEY HAVE PETS COMING IN FROM VARIOUS CONDITIONS, SOMETIMES THAT LEADS TO AN OUTBREAK, WHICH THEY RECENTLY HAD WITH A DISTEMPER OUTBREAK. SO NONE OF THIS IS GOOD. WE'RE NOT BUILDING A NEW SHELTER. THE POINT THAT COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN MADE ABOUT IF WE BUILT A NEW ONE, WE WOULD JUST FILL IT UP. WE NEED TO GET AHEAD OF THIS ISSUE. AND WE ALSO NEED TO EDUCATE OUR PUBLIC ABOUT SPAY NEUTER. BUT THE BOSTON CONSULTING GROUP HAD DONE A STUDY A FEW YEARS AGO THAT HAD RECOMMENDED THAT DALLAS INVEST MORE IN SPAY NEUTER TO GIVE US CONTROL OVER OUR ANIMAL POPULATION, BUT THAT THAT FUNDING LEVEL THAT WE NEED JUST HAS NOT HAPPENED. AND SO WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO CHANGE THAT. IF YOU HAVE PARTS OF YOUR DISTRICTS THAT DEAL WITH EXCESSIVE FERAL CATS, YOU MAY SEE AN UPTICK IN COYOTES COMING INTO RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. AND THAT STRIKES FEAR IN THE HEART OF OUR RESIDENTS. COMPOUNDING THAT, IF YOU'VE DEALT WITH LOOSE DOGS, WE KNOW THE LIFE ENDING DAMAGE THAT LOOSE DOGS HAVE CAUSED IN OUR CITY. SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US SUPPORT DALLAS ANIMAL SERVICES WITH MORE FUNDS FOR SPAY NEUTER. I DON'T RECALL IF HE HAD TOUCHED ON THE FACT THAT THE $184,000 THAT WE HAD ALLOCATED LAST YEAR, AND THAT WE'RE DOING THIS YEAR ONLY WENT THROUGH APRIL. AND SO THERE'S CERTAINLY THE CAPACITY OUR NONPROFITS ARE MAXED OUT. THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE DAS GET MORE FUNDS. BUT I ALSO DID A LITTLE INVESTIGATING. DAS HAD 74,000 CALLS THROUGH 311 LAST YEAR. 14,000 WERE LOOSE ANIMAL CALLS AND 5000 WERE AGGRESSIVE ANIMAL CALLS. AND SO IF WE TALK ABOUT OUR NEIGHBORHOODS, HAVING THAT LOOSE, AGGRESSIVE ANIMAL IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS PRETTY SCARY AND THAT CAN BE VERY HARMFUL. SO I WOULD ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT IN FUNDING THIS SPAY NEUTER THAT WILL HELP ALL OF DALLAS HELP GAIN CONTROL OF OUR ANIMAL POPULATION. THANK YOU. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. WE'RE ON AMENDMENT NUMBER SIX. THANK YOU. SO I SEE WE'RE WORKING ON DECIMATING THE SEPTIC FUND. JACK, CAN YOU TELL US HOW MUCH WOULD BE LEFT IF THIS AMENDMENT PASSED? SO THE UNENCUMBERED BALANCE PRIOR TO THE AMENDMENT NUMBER FIVE WAS 935,005 63. SO WITH THE PASSAGE OF AMENDMENT NUMBER FIVE, THAT LEAVES A BALANCE OF $548 AND 95, $548,951. WITH THIS AMENDMENT, IT TAKES THE BALANCE DOWN TO $148, 951 AND 48,000 148,000. SORRY. 951. SO YOU CAN HELP SEVEN HOUSES, THEN MAYBE NINE, MAYBE NINE. LESS THAN TEN HOUSES. SHAME ON US, SHAME ON US. IF YOU'VE BEEN ON THIS COUNCIL SINCE 2019, AND YOU HAVE LISTENED YEAR AFTER YEAR AS OUR COLLEAGUES HAVE FOUGHT TO BE ABLE TO HELP RECTIFY THIS ISSUE. SHAME ON US. CITY MANAGER, I HAVE TO ASK YOU, THERE'S A CONSIDERATION IF THIS MONEY IS NOT ACTUALLY NEEDED FOR THE SEPTIC PROGRAM, WHAT CONSIDERATION DID YOU AND YOUR STAFF GIVE TO HOW ELSE THIS COULD BE USED TO ACCOMPLISH THE CITY'S ALREADY STATED GOALS, INSTEAD OF THE PET PROJECTS OF COUNCIL MEMBERS? AND THAT PUN WAS INTENTIONAL. WE HAVE NOT TAKEN THAT APPROACH IN ANY OF THE OPERA BUCKETS THAT ARE BEFORE US STILL. IT WAS REALLY ABOUT MAKING SURE THAT AS WE LOOK AT PROGRAMS WE ALSO MADE IN OUR BUDGET, IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET, LOOKING AT EVEN SOME OF THE DEPARTMENTAL ALLOCATIONS FOR ARPA DOLLARS. SOME OF THAT FUNDING WAS REPROGRAMED TO BE ABLE TO ADDRESS NEEDS. AND I'LL GIVE YOU A GOOD EXAMPLE. THE FUNDING THAT WAS INCLUDED IN THIS PROPOSED BUDGET THAT ALLOWED FOR US TO ELEVATE THE NUMBER OF STREET LANE MILES WE USED, FUNDING THAT CAME FROM US LOOKING AT THE ARPA DOLLARS, WE ALSO LOOKED AT ARPA DOLLARS THAT HAD NOT BEEN USED IN OTHER CATEGORIES TO ELEVATE OUR INVESTMENT OF EVEN OUR HOMELESS RESPONSE SYSTEM. [04:45:03] SO WE'VE ALREADY LOOKED AT THE BUDGET, AND WE IDENTIFIED WAYS THAT WE COULD USE SOME OF THE FUNDING THAT HAD NOT BEEN USED IN THE WAYS THAT WE HAD ORIGINALLY PLANNED. PROGRAMS HAD NOT MOVED FORWARD IN THE BUCKETS THAT THE CITY MANAGER HAD IDENTIFIED, NOT TAKING ANY OF THE BUCKET OF FUNDING THAT WAS DESIGNATED FOR CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS TO DO THEIR DISCRETIONARY PROJECTS. SO WE'VE ALREADY DONE A REVIEW OF ALL OF THE ARPA DOLLARS ACROSS THE ENTIRE, I WOULD SAY, ACROSS ALL OF THE CITY DEPARTMENTS. WELL, I THINK WE ALREADY ADDRESSED THIS ISSUE OF DALLAS ANIMAL SERVICES AND THEIR NEEDS, AND THEY'RE IMPORTANT AND I CARE ABOUT THEM. BUT I ABSOLUTELY WILL NOT BE A PARTY TO TAKING APART THIS SEPTIC PROGRAM. THANK YOU. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM BE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. SURE. AND I WANT TO COME BACK TO THIS BECAUSE I KNOW THAT WE JUST HAD A THOUGHTFUL DISCUSSION AROUND THIS. AND MY FIRST THOUGHT AROUND THIS PARTICULAR FUND WAS, HOW IS IT PERFORMING? I WOULD NOT WANT TO TAKE AWAY FROM SOMETHING THAT IS SERVING RESIDENTS AND THAT IS PERFORMING WELL. BUT IF MONEY IS SITTING IN A FUND AND IT'S NOT BEING USED, AND EVEN MORE IMPORTANTLY, WE'RE HEARING THAT WHAT WE FOUND WAS SOMETHING WE SUPPOSED TO BE TRUE RESIDENTS ARE SAYING THEY DON'T WANT. AND I THINK IT'S SHAMEFUL IF ONE PART OF DALLAS IS TRYING TO TELL ANOTHER PART OF DALLAS SOUTHERN DALLAS WHAT'S RIGHT. WE ARE CRAWLING OUT OF THAT SLIME. WE DON'T TELL PEOPLE WHAT'S RIGHT. I'M GOING TO TELL YOU WHAT'S RIGHT FOR YOU. SO I THINK THIS IS WHERE WE NEED TO HEAR ABOUT HOW WE CAN USE DOLLARS MORE EFFECTIVELY. I MEAN, SOME OF THE MOST HORRIFIC INSTANCES AROUND LOOSE, AGGRESSIVE ANIMALS HAVE HAPPENED IN SOUTHERN DALLAS. I MEAN, I SEE THIS AS A TRANSFER FROM SOMETHING WHERE MONEY CAN JUST SIT THERE OR MONEY CAN BE PUT INTO ACTION FOR SAFETY AROUND THE WHOLE CITY, AND PERHAPS EVEN WITH AN EMPHASIS IN THAT PART OF THE CITY. SO I CAN TELL YOU, I, I WOULD NOT HAVE PROPOSED THIS THIS WAY IF I THOUGHT OF IT ANY OTHER WAY. SO THAT IS WHY I'M ASKING FOR YOUR SUPPORT, BECAUSE I THINK THIS WILL BE HELPFUL TO THE CITY AS A WHOLE. BUT IN SOME PARTICULAR AREAS WHERE WE HAVE SEEN IT, WE DON'T HAVE TO SUPPOSE IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. IT HAS HAPPENED. IT'S CAUSED A LOSS OF LIFE. SO THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING THAT WE WE USE THESE FUNDS TO HELP DALLAS ANIMAL SERVICES GET AHEAD OF CONTROLLING OUR ANIMAL POPULATION WITH SPAY NEUTER. THANK YOU, MISS BLACKMON. YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT NUMBER SIX. THANK YOU. OKAY. I'M CONFUSED. SO WE HAVE 1.3 IN THIS FUND. WE'VE DEPLETED IT AS MY AMENDMENT PLUS THE ENCUMBERED 364. AND SO SO MY QUESTION IS, IS MY INTENT WHEN I ASKED ABOUT THE FUTURE OF THE PROGRAM AS FAR AS FOR THE FITTING OF THE HOUSES, IT WAS SAID FUTURE FUNDS, IF WARRANTED, WILL BE ALLOCATED BY DEDICATED REVENUE FOR CONNECTIONS THROUGH THE RENTAL CHARGES. AND AND AS WELL AS THIS, ANYTHING THAT LEFT OVER. SO I'M CONFUSED. EVEN THOUGH THIS FUND CAN MAY GO AWAY, THE SERVICE OF CONNECTING THEM WON'T. THAT'S MY QUESTION. LIKE, THERE'LL STILL BE ACCESS TO FUNDS IN WHICH TO CONNECT INDIVIDUALS. WE WOULD HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT, AGAIN, IT'S BACK TO THE PROGRESSION OF THE PROGRAM, THAT WE WOULD ALLOCATE THAT THROUGH THE BUDGET. AND I THINK TELL ME WHAT THE PROGRAM'S NAME IS RIGHT NOW AS IT RELATES TO THE ARPA BUDGET. WE CALLED IT THE SEPTIC PROGRAM. OKAY, I'M TALKING ABOUT IF ARPA GOES AWAY BECAUSE IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING YOU WOULD THEN TAKE OVER THE CONNECTIONS, I'D HAVE TO HAVE SARA TO COME OUT AND GIVE THE EXACT NAME OF THAT PROGRAM. I'M NOT AWARE OF WHAT THEY'RE CALLING THAT. I WAS REALLY JUST TALKING ABOUT THE SEPTIC PROGRAM. I'M TRYING TO ASK IS IF THE IT DOESN'T MATTER IF IT'S ARPA OR DWU, THE MONEY IS THERE IN WHICH TO MAKE THESE CONNECTIONS WHEN PEOPLE WANT THEM TO BE MADE. AND WE'RE GOING TO PRIORITIZE THAT. WE WOULD ALLOCATE THROUGH THE BUDGET THE FUNDING TO SUPPORT ONGOING CONNECTIONS, MOVING PEOPLE FROM SEPTIC TO CONNECT TO OUR WATER AND WASTEWATER LINES IF THEY CHOOSE TO DO SO. I DON'T KNOW WHAT SHE'S CALLING THE NAME OF THE PROGRAM, BUT WE WOULD MAKE THAT AVAILABLE AS A AS A ONGOING WAY TO INVEST IN THOSE AREAS. THE PROGRAM WOULD BE. YES, MA'AM. SARAH CAN. SO I'LL HAVE SARAH TO TALK ABOUT THE WAYS. YES. SO IT WOULD HAVE TO BUT AGAIN, IT WOULD BE A PART OF THE BUDGET PROCESS. SARAH. STANDARD FOR DALLAS WATER UTILITIES. WHAT WE HAVE DISCUSSED WITH THE CFO AND THE BUDGET DIRECTOR, THERE IS PART OF THE STREET FUND THAT WE WOULD BRING BACK TO YOU IN THE UNSERVED AREAS THAT WE WOULD REPRIORITIZE TO COMPLETE THESE IF THE FUNDS WERE WARRANTED IN FUTURE [04:50:07] YEARS. SO THERE WILL BE MONEY THERE THROUGH THE BUDGET PROCESS, AS THROUGH THE BUDGET, THROUGH THE BUDGET, THROUGH THE ENTERPRISE FUND. I THINK IT'S THE STREET AND THE ALLEY FUND IS WHAT I HEARD YOU WOULD BE REPLENISHING, BUT DWU COLLECTS THOSE FEES. SO LET ME INTERJECT, IF I MAY. JACK GARLAND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER. WE FUND A SEPARATE FUND CALLED THE STREET AND ALLEY FUND. WE CONTRIBUTE FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO IT. DALLAS WATER UTILITY CONTRIBUTES TO IT, SANITATION CONTRIBUTES TO IT, AND IT'S USED FOR STREET AND ALLEY IMPROVEMENTS. AND SO THE FUNDS THAT THE CASH THAT MISS STANDIFER IS TALKING ABOUT IS SHE WOULD HAVE TO PULL SOME OF THAT BACK FROM GOING INTO THE STREET FUND IF IT IS NECESSARY TO FUND A SEPTIC CONNECTION PROGRAM PROGRAM. BUT WE'VE WE'VE WE'VE DETERMINED THAT ABOUT 23 OF THE INDIVIDUALS OF THE 200 THAT WE'VE. SO 10% OF THE FOLKS THAT WE HAVE SAID, HEY, THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY HAS SAID, I'LL SIGN UP FOR IT. YES. AND THOSE HAVE ALREADY BEEN ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE ARPA BUCKET THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. AND SO THE BALANCE THAT WAS MENTIONED IS WHAT'S LEFT NOW. SO ANYTHING THAT WOULD COME ONLINE IN 2026, WHATEVER BALANCE WE HAVE, WE WOULD USE THAT. AND THEN AS PART OF THE BUDGET, WE WOULD HAVE TO WORK TO IDENTIFY ADDITIONAL FUNDING. AND BACK TO THE WAY FUNDING GOES INTO THAT STREET AND ALLEY FUND. HOW DO WE THEN REPROGRAM THAT TO MAKE SURE IF THIS IS A PROGRAM THAT COUNCIL WANTS US TO CONTINUE, THEN YOU WOULD BE ASKING ME TO FIND THE FUNDING TO BE ABLE TO KEEP IT MOVING FORWARD, BECAUSE WHAT I DID AT THE 16,000 I BASICALLY PUT IN 25 HOUSES BECAUSE WE WERE SEEING 23 AS THE TREND, JUST AS A TREND. AND IT'S ABOUT $415,000. IS THAT A DOABLE AMOUNT TO FIND IN ALL THESE FUNDS THAT YOU'VE TALKED ABOUT WHEN THE TIME COMES? I THINK IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE, IF THAT TIME COMES, WE WILL WORK TO IDENTIFY THE FUNDING AS COMMITTED. OKAY. THROUGH THE THROUGH THE BUDGET, WE WOULD FIGURE WE WOULD FIGURE THAT OUT IF THAT'S THE WILL OF THE BODY, BECAUSE, I MEAN, THERE'S A NEED HERE WITH DAS AND THERE IS A PROGRAM THAT EXISTS, BUT IT'S NOT BEING UTILIZED TO THE FULLEST POTENTIAL. BUT WE CAN MOVE IT DOWN. SO IT'S STILL ACCESSIBLE AND WE HAVE THE MONEY IN WHICH TO DO THAT. YOU WOULD BE GIVING ME THE GUIDANCE THAT YOU WANT THE PROGRAM TO CONTINUE, REGARDLESS OF THE BALANCE THAT'S HERE AND HOW THIS BODY CHOOSES TO USE THE AVAILABLE ARPA DOLLARS. NOW, YOU WOULD BE SAYING, WE WANT THIS PROGRAM TO CONTINUE AND ANY RESIDENCES THAT WANT TO COME ONLINE, YOU WOULD BE ASKING ME TO IDENTIFY THE WAYS TO KEEP THAT PROGRAM MOVING FORWARD. THAT WOULD BE YOUR POLICY DIRECTION. OKAY. BECAUSE, I MEAN, I'VE PUT IN A SEPTIC TANK IN MY WEST TEXAS AND THEY'RE NOT CHEAP. AND SO ONCE YOU GO THAT ROUTE, IT IS THERE FOR A DURATION. YOU WANT TO EXERCISE EVERY LAST DOLLAR YOU CAN GET OUT OF IT. SO IF PEOPLE HAVE INVESTED IN IT, THEY WON'T. THEY'RE NOT GOING TO CHANGE. IT'S GOING TO BE HARD UNTIL THEY HAVE TO REPLACE IT. AND THEN THEY'RE GOING TO LOOK IS MY 16,000. IF I CAN GET 16,000 FROM THE CITY AND IT PAYS FOR THIS, THEN YES. BUT THEN IT STARTS A WHOLE NOTHER DISCUSSION OF WHAT DOES IT DO TO THE FABRIC OF THE COMMUNITY, BECAUSE THERE IS AN AMBIANCE OF HAVING A SEPTIC TANK IN THAT IN THOSE FIVE ACRE. EXACTLY. AND I WANT TO JUST GO BACK TO THE TIMING PIECE BECAUSE I THINK IT'S CRITICAL. WE ARE STILL WORKING TO GET THE THE DEVELOPMENT CONSTRUCTION STUFF DONE. SO IT'S STILL GOING TO TAKE US TIME TO BE ABLE TO GET TO ALL. WE NEVER PLANNED TO GET TO ALL 47 AREAS AT THE EXACT SAME TIME. AND SO THAT WORK HAS TO CONTINUE. AND THAT'S WHY WE'VE TALKED ABOUT WHAT'S BEEN COMPLETED. AND THERE'S MORE COMPLETION IN THE SCHEDULE, BUT IT'S ALL A TIMING PIECE. NOT ALL OF THOSE AREAS WILL BE DONE AT THE SAME TIME. YES. SO WHEN DID WE GET THESE FUNDS? DURING THE PANDEMIC. I WAS AT 20, 22, 21. WE 2121. SO IT'S BEEN FOUR YEARS AND WE'VE HAD 23 SIGN UPS. THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. I'M JUST. AND THEN. BUT WE DO HAVE A COMMITMENT MOVING FORWARD FOR THE WE HAVE 20 FUNDING FOR WE WANT TO CONTINUE IT. AND IF WE NEED THAT FUNDING WE WILL FIND IT. THAT'S WHAT YOU WOULD BE DIRECTING ME TO DO? YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. LOOKS LIKE MAYOR PRO TEM YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT NUMBER SIX. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I'M NOT SURE WHERE TO REALLY START WITH THIS ONE. ONE IS. I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THE ITEM. IT'S A QUESTION FOR DWU. WHAT WAS OUR COMMITMENT TO SEPTIC? A SEPTIC PROGRAM CONCEPT PRIOR TO THE ARPA DOLLARS BEING APPROVED? [04:55:04] SARAH. STANDARD FOR DALLAS WATER UTILITIES. THE CITY COUNCIL WAS BRIEFED ON A CONCEPT THAT WE WERE CHANGING IN TOTAL AROUND 2019 TIME FRAME, AND WE TYPICALLY DID NOT PUT IN NEW NON-EXISTING WATER OR WASTEWATER INFRASTRUCTURE IN NEIGHBORHOODS. AND IT WAS SOMETHING THAT WE ALLOWED DEVELOPERS TO DO ON BEHALF OF THE CITY AND DONATE IT BACK INSTEAD. SO UNDER THE UNSERVED PROGRAM, WHAT WE BEGAN TO DO WAS LOOK AT THE AREAS WE HAD IDENTIFIED IN THE LATE 90S THROUGH THE 2000 TIME FRAME AND THOSE THAT HAD RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES. WE WANTED TO BE ABLE TO OFFER THE CITY CONNECTION LINE, AND THAT WAS PART OF WHAT WE WERE DOING IN THAT 2019. IT WAS GOING TO TAKE US IN EXCESS OF TEN YEARS TO GET THROUGH THE DIFFERENT AREAS. THE ARPA MONEY INFUSED IT AND ALLOWED US TO BRING THAT SCHEDULE IN 5 OR 6 YEARS SO THAT IT DIDN'T EXPAND OUT. THERE WAS ALWAYS GOING TO BE A NEED TO CONNECT RESIDENTIAL TO THE CITY LINE. AND THE ARPA FUNDS CAME IN WITHOUT THAT FINAL PLAN. AND THERE IS THIS PROGRAM ONLY FOR EXISTING PROPERTIES. WHERE IS IT AVAILABLE FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION? IT IS ONLY FOR THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL HOMES THAT ARE OCCUPIED. OKAY. AND THE STREET AND ALLEY FUND. WHAT OTHER. WHAT'S THE FLEXIBILITY WITH THAT? WHAT OTHER PROJECTS COULD BE IMPLEMENTED WITH THOSE DOLLARS? SO THE FUND HAS WAS SET UP FOR THE PURPOSE OF FUNDING MULTIYEAR PROJECTS, STREET PROJECTS ALLEY PROJECTS, SIDEWALKS, BRIDGE REPAIRS, THINGS LIKE THAT. IT'S JUST A PAY AS YOU GO WAY OF DOING SOME OF THOSE TYPES OF PROJECTS BY THE PUBLIC WORKS AND TRANSPORTATION. THANK YOU AGAIN. YOU KNOW, I DON'T REALLY SEE HOW YOU SLICE OR DICE THIS ONE. I DO BELIEVE IT'S HURTING THE COMMUNITIES THAT THESE DOLLARS WERE INTENDED FOR. I'D MUCH RATHER, IF THIS PROGRAM NEEDS TO BE VISITED AND HOW WE'RE GETTING RESIDENTS TO SIGN UP. AND DOLLARS NEED TO BE SHIFTED TOWARDS ALLEYS AND STREETS WITHIN THAT COMMUNITY. THAT WOULD BE MY PREFERENCE. AGAIN, I THINK THERE WAS A COMMITMENT BEFORE THIS COUNCIL TO DEDICATE THOSE DOLLARS TO THESE 47 AREAS. AND SO I BELIEVE THOSE DOLLARS SHOULD STAY WITHIN THOSE COMMUNITIES. THANK YOU, MR. ROTH. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT NUMBER SIX. THANK YOU. JUST TO CLARIFY FOR ME AND MAYBE I MISSED SOMETHING, THE SOURCE OF THE FUNDS THAT IT SHOWS ON, ON MY SHEET HERE IS REDUCING PHASE ONE DALLAS BIKE PLAN ALLOCATION. OR IS ARE THOSE FUNDS COMING OUT OF THESE ARPA FUNDS? NO, SIR. I THINK THERE WAS AS THE MOTION WAS INTRODUCED IT WAS SWITCHED OUT. THE SOURCE OF FUNDS WAS CHANGED FROM THE BIKE PLAN FUNDS TO THE ARPA FUNDS. OKAY. I'M SORRY I DIDN'T CATCH THAT. THANK YOU. MR. RIDLEY, MR. CHAIRMAN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT NUMBER SIX. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. SARAH, COULD YOU COME BACK? SO, SARAH, UNDER THE SEPTIC PROGRAM, WE DON'T JUST EXTEND SEWER AND WATER LINES TO INDIVIDUAL HOMES. WE EXTEND THEM DOWN THEIR STREET WHERE THEY CAN SERVE MULTIPLE HOMES, DEPENDING UPON WHO OPTS IN AND WHO OPTS OUT. IS THAT CORRECT? IT'S A TWO FOLD APPROACH. SO THE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT WERE IDENTIFIED, WHAT WE ARE DOING IS WE'RE INSTALLING MAIN LANES OF WATER AND WASTEWATER INFRASTRUCTURE. THAT IS NOT THIS FUNDING THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. THAT'S OTHER FUNDING. THE FUNDING WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RIGHT NOW IS ACTUAL DOLLARS THAT GOES FROM THE CITY'S LINE TO THOSE RESIDENTIAL HOMES TO DECOMMISSION NOT ONLY THE SEPTIC SYSTEM, BUT TO RETROFIT THEIR HOMES, BECAUSE THOSE HOMES NEED TO BE RETROFITTED IN ORDER TO TIE INTO THE CITY LINE. OKAY. SO TWO SEPARATE FUNDING, AND WE'RE ONLY TALKING ABOUT THE RESIDENTIAL CONNECTION, JUST THE SERVICE LINE. YES, SIR. OKAY. WELL, I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF THIS ITEM. IF WE'RE PLANNING TO RAID FUNDS THAT WILL BE ALLOCATED TO STREET AND ALLEY IMPROVEMENTS IN THE FUTURE. IN ORDER TO FUND THIS PROGRAM. BECAUSE WE'RE RAIDING IT NOW. I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF THAT. MY PRIORITIES COME DOWN IN FAVOR OF FULLY FUNDING STREET AND ALLEY IMPROVEMENTS. IF ANYTHING, WE NEED TO INCREASE OUR ALLOCATION TO THAT USE OF FUNDS. AND I'M JUST NOT IN FAVOR OF RAIDING THIS FUND ANY FURTHER FOR SEPTIC PROGRAM. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT SIX. THANK YOU. WHO CAN EXPLAIN WHAT KIND OF OUTREACH IS BEING DONE ON THIS PROGRAM? [05:00:01] I'M SORRY, NOT ON DALLAS ANIMAL SERVICES. ON ON THE SEPTIC TANK PROGRAM. BUT THANK YOU. WE DID DIRECT MAILERS TO THE AREA THAT WE WERE WORKING WITH DALLAS WATER UTILITIES ON DIRECT MAIL. SO I'M HAVING A LITTLE PTSD ABOUT OUR LEAD BASED PAINT PROGRAM, A GRANT WE ACCEPTED AND SERVED ABSOLUTELY ZERO RESIDENTS BUT EXPENDED ALL OF THE ADMIN. AND HERE WE ARE WITH A FUNDED PROGRAM AND PROBABLY INSUFFICIENT OUTREACH. AND THAT'S PROBABLY WHY THIS HASN'T HAPPENED THE WAY IT SHOULD. AND THAT IS WHAT COMES TO MIND. I'M SORRY CYNTHIA. I APPRECIATE YOU SO MUCH. BUT AGAIN, OUR FORMER COLLEAGUE WOULD BE SITTING HERE SAYING, WHAT KIND OF MARKETING ARE WE DOING? WHAT KIND OF OUTREACH ARE WE DOING? AND THERE'S NOBODY THAT SERVED WITH HIM THAT DOESN'T KNOW. THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT HE'D BE SAYING RIGHT NOW. AND THERE THERE'S NO REASON, EVEN IF YOU INVESTED IN A SEPTIC TANK, THAT YOU WOULDN'T TAKE A FREE SEWER LINE INTO THE CITY, WHICH IS GOING TO BE A LOT LESS EXPENSIVE THAN WHAT IT COSTS TO CLEAN OUT A SEPTIC TANK. SO I HAVE A FEELING THAT WE HAVE AN OUTREACH PROBLEM, AND THIS IS A HUGE OPPORTUNITY TO MODERNIZE LIFE FOR THE PEOPLE, ESPECIALLY IN DISTRICT EIGHT. I'LL TELL YOU, THE RESIDENTS OF MINE ARE LIVING IN WHAT IS OUR MOST EXPENSIVE PROPERTIES BEHIND A GATE. THEY HAD OTHER REASONS, BUT IT WAS ABOUT FINANCIAL FOR THEM TO PUT IN THE SEPTIC TANK. WE SHOULDN'T EVEN BE. WE SHOULDN'T EVEN BE DOING THAT. WE SHOULD HAVE HAD SOME SORT OF QUALIFICATION FOR THIS. BUT I THINK WE HAVE AN OUTREACH PROBLEM. SO IF I IF I MAY. YEAH. THE SEPTIC TANK PROGRAM IS A VERY UNIQUE PROGRAM, AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, BECAUSE YOU DO HAVE TO HAVE A SEPTIC TANK AND WORKING WITH DALLAS WATER UTILITIES TO PUT IN THE LINES THAT HAVE TO BE IN THE PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE FIRST IN ORDER FOR US TO OUTREACH TO THE HOMEOWNERS IN THOSE AREAS, TO CONNECT, LIMIT THE PEOPLE THAT WE OUTREACH TO. SO IT'S NOT AN OPEN OUTREACH APPLICATION, BECAUSE NOT EVERYBODY HAS THE LINES THAT CAN CONNECT AT THE RIGHT TIME. SO WE DO HAVE TO WORK TOGETHER TO GET THAT DONE AT THE AT THE RIGHT TIME. AND SO THAT IS WHAT WE DID. WE DIRECTLY MAILED TO THE HOMEOWNERS THAT HAVE THE LINES AVAILABLE TO THEM TO CONNECT TO, IN ORDER TO SEE IF THEY WERE INTERESTED IN TRANSFORMING. NOW ALSO, WE DIDN'T JUST HEAR THAT FOLKS DIDN'T WANT TO JUST NOT HAVE WATER UTILITIES. WE HEARD THAT THEY DON'T WANT TO BILL EITHER. AND RIGHT NOW WITH SEPTIC, THEY DON'T HAVE A BILL. THEY GET TO HAVE THEIR SEPTIC IN WATER WITHOUT THE BILLS THAT COME WITH CONNECTION TO CITY SERVICES. SO IT WASN'T JUST ONE THING THAT THEY JUST DIDN'T WANT TO BOTHER WITH. DO THEY HAVE A BILL FOR DRINKING WATER? YES. AND DO THEY HAVE A BILL FOR STORM WATER? I'M NOT SURE. I'D HAVE TO ASK. SARAH. YES. SARAH IS SAYING YES. SO JUST NOT WASTE WATER. RIGHT. SO ARE YOU SAYING THAT OF THE IDENTIFIED PROPERTIES THAT HAVE SEPTIC TANKS, YOU HAVEN'T DONE OUTREACH TO ALL OF THEM BECAUSE THEY DON'T ALL HAVE THAT LINE. THAT IS CORRECT. BECAUSE AS AS CITY MANAGER TOLBERT SAID, WE HAVE TO START THE NEXT PHASE OF APPLICANTS ONCE THE THE THE PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE LINES ARE IN AND THAT HAS NOT HAPPENED. WHAT'S THE UNIVERSE OF SEPTIC TANK PROPERTIES? 400, I BELIEVE IS THE NUMBER THAT WE IDENTIFIED. 400. HOW MANY HAVE YOU ASKED? WOULD YOU LIKE TO BE ON? 200. 200. AND IT'S 200. COUNCILWOMAN MENDELSOHN. BECAUSE THOSE WOULD BE THE ONES WHERE WE'VE COMPLETED THE WORK. AND SO WE WOULD BE GOING INTO THE NEXT BATCH, AS I MENTIONED, GOING INTO THE UPCOMING YEAR, AS THAT WORK IS COMPLETED, WE WOULD BE DOING OUTREACH TO THE NEXT GROUP. SO THAT'S WHAT WE'VE DONE UP TO THIS POINT. SO YOU WOULD BE LEAVING A FUND IN WITH THIS AMENDMENT TO BE ABLE TO SERVE LESS THAN TEN HOMES, IF YOU'VE NOT EVEN ASKED 200 OF THE HOMES IF THEY WANT IT. SO LET ME REPHRASE. LET ME REPHRASE IT. UP UNTIL THIS POINT, THE CURRENT PROGRAM, THERE WAS AN IDENTIFICATION OF ABOUT 400 RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES THAT COULD PARTICIPATE IN THE PROGRAM. IN THE AREA THAT WE'VE COMPLETED OUR WORK, WE'VE DONE OUTREACH TO 200 THERE IN THE AREA WHERE THE WORK HAS BEEN COMPLETED. [05:05:06] OUT OF THAT, 223 HAVE ACCEPTED THE PROGRAM. AND WE HAVE WE'VE PAID THOSE COSTS GOING INTO THE UPCOMING YEAR. WE WILL CONTINUE OUR WORK AND THERE SHOULD BE ANOTHER 200 IN THAT NUMBER. BUT THAT WORK WILL BE SPREAD OUT BETWEEN FY 26 AND FY 27. SO IF THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVES THIS AMENDMENT AND THOSE FUNDS ARE USED AND YOU WANT THE PROGRAM TO CONTINUE, YOU WOULD BE ASKING ME TO IDENTIFY FUNDING FOR ANYBODY IN THAT 200. IF IT'S 50 HOMES, 100 HOMES OR HOWEVER MANY, YOU WOULD BE ASKING ME TO IDENTIFY THE FUNDING TO BE ABLE TO CONTINUE THE PROGRAM BEYOND WHERE WE ARE TODAY. SO I THINK THIS HAS BEEN ILLUMINATING. BASICALLY, IF THE SAME ACCEPTANCE RATE HAPPENS FOR THE NEXT GROUP OF 200, YOU DON'T EVEN HAVE HALF OF THE FUNDING YOU NEED AND YOU'RE GOING TO GO FIND FUNDING INSTEAD OF THIS AMENDMENT HAVING FOUND APPROPRIATE FUNDING. THANK YOU. I THOUGHT I WAS OUT OF TIME. SO I THINK THAT IT IS VERY CLEAR THIS IS A VERY BAD IDEA TO PULL THE MONEY FROM THIS, WHICH WAS INTENDED TO SOLVE A PROBLEM. AND NOW YOU'RE GOING TO TAKE THE MONEY AWAY AND WE WILL BE LEFT WITH THE SAME EXACT PROBLEM. THANK YOU. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I'D LIKE TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT TO THE SOURCE OF FUNDS FOR WHAT I HAD PROPOSED. I'D LIKE TO CHANGE THE AMOUNT TO $200,000 AND GO BACK TO REDUCING THE PHASE ONE DALLAS BIKE PLAN. SO REDUCING THE DALLAS PHASE ONE BIKE PLAN BY $200,000 TO HELP FUND SPAY NEUTER AT DAS AS THE USE OF FUNDS. SECOND. OKAY, IT'S BEEN SECONDED. I JUST WANT TO CONFIRM SOMETHING. SO THIS JUST TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND. SO THIS AMENDMENT WOULD IF IT WERE TO BE ADOPTED, IT WOULD, IT WOULD, IT WOULD BASICALLY REPLACE THE, THE ORIGINAL. YOU HAD AN AMENDMENT THAT, THAT DID SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WAS WRITTEN HERE, BUT THAT WAS THE WAY YOU INTRODUCED IT. SO WE ONLY HAVE ONE AMENDMENT ON THE FLOOR. OKAY. SO EVERYONE YOU'VE HEARD THE AMENDMENT AND THERE WAS A SECOND. SO YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM, TO EXPLAIN YOUR AMENDMENT TO YOUR AMENDMENT. SURE. WELL, I'M LISTENING TO THE BODY, AND I'M I'M SENSING THAT SOME FOLKS DON'T WANT TO GO ANY FARTHER INTO THE FUND, THAT WE AREN'T CONFIDENT THAT IT WILL BE USED. BUT I WANT TO HEAR THAT. AND I ALSO WANT TO LOOK AT HOW WE CAN HELP. MORE MONEY, MORE PEOPLE WITH THIS AMOUNT OF MONEY, WHICH I THINK WILL HELP THE WHOLE COMMUNITY. IF WE ARE TAKING CARE OF OUR ANIMAL OVERPOPULATION PROBLEM, WHICH IS PERSISTENT BY HAVING A AN INCREASED AMOUNT FOR DALLAS SPAY NEUTER TO TO FOR DALLAS ANIMAL SERVICES TO WORK WITH IN SPAY NEUTER. WE KNOW THAT THEY EXHAUSTED THEIR CURRENT BUDGET BY APRIL OF THIS PAST YEAR AND WE'VE HELD THEM FLAT. SO I FEEL LIKE IT HELPS EVERY SINGLE DISTRICT TO BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THIS PROGRAM. I KNOW THAT OUR BIKE PLAN IS IMPORTANT TO US. THIS DOESN'T TOUCH THE MAINTENANCE FEE, IT DOESN'T TOUCH THE DART ALLOCATION. AND IT JUST TAKES A BIT FROM THE THIS NEXT YEAR'S PLAN. I THINK THAT THE AMOUNT OF FOLKS WHO WOULD BE AFFECTED BY THE BIKE PLAN, OFFSET BY THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO WOULD BE AFFECTED BY THIS PROGRAM AT DALLAS ANIMAL SERVICES, IS VASTLY DIFFERENT. AND SO THAT'S WHY I'VE LOOKED AT THIS. THIS SOURCE OF FUNDS, AND I WOULD ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT. THANK YOU. MR. RIDLEY, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE AMENDMENT BY THE DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM TO THE AMENDMENT NUMBER SIX. WELL, THANK YOU, MAYOR. I WAS OPPOSED TO THE SOURCE OF FUNDS BEING THIS SEPTIC PROGRAM, BUT I'M EVEN MORE OPPOSED TO USING THE BIKE PLAN. THE BIKE PLAN IS SOMETHING WE JUST ADOPTED THIS YEAR EARLIER. WE ARE ON THE CUSP OF COMPLETING THE CIRCLE LOOP THAT WOULD CONNECT ALL OF DALLAS TO THE LOOP BIKE TRAIL. AND IT'S NOT JUST BIKERS, IT'S PEDESTRIANS. I GOT A BRIEFING YESTERDAY ABOUT THE KATY TRAIL, WHICH HAS 2 MILLION USERS A YEAR ON ONE TRAIL, AND WE HAVE, WHAT, 2025 TRAILS AROUND THE CITY. AND IT'S ALL ABOUT CONNECTING THEM SO THEY'RE NOT ISOLATED AND PEOPLE CAN USE THEM TO COMMUTE, TO WORK, TO SHOP, TO VISIT FRIENDS AND USE THAT AS ALTERNATIVE TO VEHICULAR TRANSPORTATION. AND SO THEY HAVE SO MANY IMPORTANT IMPLICATIONS FOR PHYSICAL FITNESS, FOR REDUCTION OF EMISSIONS FROM OUR VEHICLE FLEET. [05:10:05] AND IT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT THERE IS A HUGE PRIORITY ON IN OUR COMMUNITIES. I KNOW IT IS IN MY DISTRICT, AND I'M NOT WILLING TO ROB THAT IN ORDER TO PAY MONEY FOR FEWER ANIMALS. CHAIRMAN WEST, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT NUMBER SIX. THANK YOU. MAYOR. A COUPLE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. I CAN'T SEE WHO'S AT THE AT THE TABLE, BUT THIS IS FOR DIRECTOR CALI. IF YOU'D LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND START. COUNCIL MEMBER WAS DEV RASTOGI. THE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER IS HERE. OKAY, GREAT. WHEN WAS THE ORIGINAL BIKE PLAN PASSED? SECOND QUESTION IS GOING TO BE FOR HOW MANY YEARS IN A ROW WAS IT UNDERFUNDED BY THE CITY IN ACCORDANCE TO THE PLAN WE HAD? YEAH. COUNCIL MEMBER WEST, WE'LL I'LL HAVE TO GET BACK TO YOU IN TERMS OF THE TIME FRAME OF WHEN THE PREVIOUS PLAN WAS COMPLETED. AND THE FUNDING LEVELS, WHAT I CAN TELL YOU IS YOU KNOW, WE RECENTLY ADOPTED THE PLAN IN 2020, YOU KNOW, JUST A FEW MONTHS AGO. AND WE HAVE DOCTOR CARLIS HERE. SO PERHAPS HE HAS THE ANSWER TO YOUR FIRST TWO QUESTIONS. HELLO. GUZMAN CARLI, DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, PUBLIC WORKS. THE PLAN WAS ADOPTED IN MAY 2025. PRIOR TO PRIOR TO THE CURRENT. THE PREVIOUS. THE PREVIOUS PLAN WAS IN 2011. OKAY. AND FOR HOW MANY YEARS IN A ROW WAS THE PLAN UNDERFUNDED? MY UNDERSTANDING WAS AT LEAST FIVE YEARS. EVERY YEAR IT WAS. I MEAN, TO THE BEST OF MY RECOLLECTION, BEFORE MY TIME. EVEN BEFORE MY TIME IT WAS UNDERFUNDED. AND THEN UNTIL WE STARTED FUNDING IT AT A MORE CONSISTENT LEVEL STARTING A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO OR SO. WELL, AND $1 MILLION TO A STREET OR ROAD IS, IS IS NOTHING COMPARED TO THE CITY BUDGET. BUT $1 MILLION TO THE BIKE PLAN IS MASSIVE. AND MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT IT WAS UNDERFUNDED BY ABOUT $1 MILLION TO A MILLION AND A HALF DOLLARS PER YEAR, WHICH WAS ABOUT HALF OF WHAT WAS PROJECTED PER YEAR FOR ALL OF THOSE YEARS. DOES THAT RING TRUE TO YOU? THAT IS. YEAH. BASED ON MY EXPERIENCE SINCE I JOINED THE CITY. SO THEN WE PUT ALL THIS WORK AND TIME AND EFFORT INTO UPDATING THE BIKE PLAN, WHICH WAS PASSED LITERALLY IN MAY OF 2025. AND AND NOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CUTS AGAIN. I JUST, YOU KNOW, I AGREE WITH MR. RIDLEY ON THIS. WE HAVE WE HAVE PEOPLE WHO WE'RE STARTING TO MAKE INROADS, AND NOW IS NOT THE TIME TO PULL BACK HERE. WE HAVE FOLKS. WHO. THE KATY TRAIL. I HAD NO IDEA IT WAS 8 MILLION PEOPLE. THAT'S THAT'S. WAS IT 8 OR 2? EITHER WAY, IT WAS A HUGE NUMBER. BUT FOR US TO ACTUALLY HAVE A FULLY CONNECTED NETWORK IN THE CITY WE CAN'T BE PULLING BACK WITH THE WORLD CUP COMING UP AND ALL OF THESE PEOPLE FROM ALL OVER THE WORLD COMING TO DALLAS USED TO GETTING AROUND THEIR CITIES IN WAYS OTHER THAN JUST CARS. THIS IS NOT THE TIME TO START CUTTING THAT BUDGET. WHAT'S THE TOTAL BUDGET, GUS? PROJECTED FOR OUR. OUR STREETS FOR THIS NEXT YEAR. WE'RE GETTING THAT ANSWER FOR YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER WEST. I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T HEAR THE. QUITE THE QUESTION. THE TOTAL NUMBER IN THE BUDGET FOR STREETS. THE TOTAL FOR THE. MY DEPARTMENT'S BUDGET. YES. OKAY. SO, STREETS. THE DPW BUDGET IS 100. ALMOST 157 MILLION. AND WHAT'S THE TOTAL BUDGET PROJECTED FOR BIKES? BIKE LANES. SO MAINTENANCE. CURRENTLY WE ARE SHOWING IN THE ORDINANCE 2.287 FOR NEXT YEAR. IS THAT CORRECT? NO, NO. THE TOTAL FOR THE BIKE LANE PROGRAM IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET IS AROUND 3.3.6, 3.6 AND 3.6 MILLION, AND THAT INCLUDES THE FUNDING FOR THE ADDITIONAL LANES AS WELL AS THE MAINTENANCE OF THE THE BIKE LANES. IT INCLUDES BOTH. SO THAT IS THE TOTAL IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET. ALL RIGHT. SO I MEAN THIS IS A THIS IS A 8% CUT. I'M WINGING IT. BUT IT'S A SIGNIFICANT CUT TO THE BIKE LANE FUND. AND I JUST THINK IT'S ABSOLUTELY THE WRONG TIME TO DO THIS. EVEN THOUGH I DO SUPPORT YOU KNOW, THE GOALS UNDER THE CREDIT. I JUST I DON'T SUPPORT THE DEBIT AT ALL. SO I'M A NO ON THIS. THANK YOU. OKAY. WE ARE. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT NUMBER SIX. [05:15:07] THANK YOU. WELL, WHEN I THINK ABOUT THE BIKE PLAN, WHICH I BELIEVE WAS PASSED NOT JUST THREE MONTHS AGO, LIKE YOU COULD LITERALLY JUST SAY 90 PLUS DAYS. I MEAN, THIS IS SOMETHING WE'RE COUNTING IN. HOW MANY DAYS AGO WE DID NOT HOW MANY YEARS AGO. LIKE, I THINK IT'S 95 DAYS OR SO. I'M JUST EYEBALLING IT. THIS WAS A UNANIMOUS VOTE. IT WAS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA OF OUR CURRENT COUNCIL MEMBERS. PEOPLE WHO SPOKE IN FAVOR OF IT INCLUDED. COUNCIL MEMBER WEST. COUNCIL MEMBER BAZALDUA. COUNCIL MEMBER WILLIS AND COUNCIL MEMBER RESENDEZ. WE ONLY HAVE $2 MILLION IN THE BIKE PLAN. WHEN YOU TAKE OUT 200,000, YOU'RE TAKING OUT 10% OF THE BIKE PLAN. HOW DO WE KNOW WHAT PROJECTS WOULD BE IMPACTED BY THIS AMENDMENT? COUNCIL MEMBER NELSON. LET ME RESPOND TO THAT. SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE DONE AS PART OF DEVELOPING THE FIVE YEAR IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOR PHASE ONE OF THE BIKE PLAN IS WE'VE IDENTIFIED A LIST OF PROJECTS. I DON'T THINK WE HAVE THOSE PROJECTS IN FRONT OF US. BUT AS WE LOOK AT THE FIVE YEAR PLAN THE BUDGET IS ABOUT 13 MILLION. AND AS WE LOOK AT FUNDING IT AT 2 MILLION A YEAR. WE'RE WE'RE WE'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDING. THE INTERESTING THING ABOUT THIS IS THE IDEA BEING PROPOSED HAS NOT BEEN TALKED TO ABOUT A COMMITTEE, HASN'T BEEN TALKED TO TO THE PUBLIC, NO PUBLIC MEETINGS. BUT THE BIKE PLAN. I HOSTED A MEETING, A TOWN HALL, JUST ON THE BIKE PLAN. I'VE TALKED ABOUT IT IN MY E! NEWS MANY TIMES. WE'VE HAD MULTIPLE FULL COUNCIL BRIEFINGS AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE BRIEFINGS FULLY VETTED. AND NOW WE'RE LOOKING AT TAKING AWAY MONEY FOR SOMETHING WE JUST PASSED LESS THAN 100 DAYS AGO AND PUTTING IT INTO SOMETHING COMPLETELY UNVETTED. WE'RE NOT EXACTLY SURE HOW IT'S GOING TO WORK OUT. WE JUST KNOW WE CARE ABOUT ANIMALS, SO WE WANT TO THROW MORE MONEY AT IT. THIS IS NOT THE WAY A BIG CITY OUGHT TO WORK. SO DO WE NEED MORE ATTENTION ON DALLAS ANIMAL SERVICES AND DO THEY NEED MORE SUPPORT? PROBABLY, YES. AND I SUPPORT THAT DEPARTMENT AND WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO DO. BUT JUST THROWING MONEY AT A PROBLEM WITH NO REAL PLAN AND TAKING IT AWAY FROM THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN FULLY VETTED, LIKE A SEPTIC PROGRAM AND THE BIKE PLAN IS A VERY BAD IDEA AND NEEDS TO BE FULLY BAKED BEFORE WE MOVE ON IT. SO I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS ITEM. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, LET ME MAKE SURE I DON'T SKIP ANYONE. LOOKS LIKE MR. RESENDEZ, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE AMENDMENT TO AMENDMENT NUMBER SIX. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I THINK THIS IS A GOOD OPPORTUNITY TO TALK ABOUT THE BENEFITS OF OF BIKE LANES AND THE BIKE PLAN. FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT DON'T KNOW, ESPECIALLY THE NEW MEMBERS, I LIKE TO RIDE MY BIKE A LOT. THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT MAY LOOK LIKE A SMALL ADJUSTMENT IN THE BUDGET, BUT IN REALITY REDUCING THE BIKE PLAN ALLOCATION IS A STEP BACKWARDS WOULD BE A STEP BACKWARDS FOR DALLAS WHEN WE ADOPTED VISION ZERO. WHEN WE APPROVED OUR MOBILITY AND CLIMATE PLANS, WE PROMISED OUR RESIDENTS THAT WE WOULD BUILD A SAFER, HEALTHIER CITY. IF WE START CUTTING HERE, WE UNDERMINE THAT TRUST. THIS ISN'T JUST ABOUT CYCLISTS. BIKE INFRASTRUCTURE MAKES OUR STREETS SAFE FOR EVERYONE. IT'S ALSO FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE. THE COST OF ONE SERIOUS CRASH CAN EXCEED. THE ANNUAL CAN EXCEED THE ALLOCATION THAT WE'RE DEBATING RIGHT NOW. EVERY DOLLAR WE INVEST IN PREVENTION SAVES THE CITY AND OUR TAXPAYERS MANY MORE DOWN THE ROAD. AND THE ECONOMIC BENEFITS ARE CLEAR. CITIES THAT INVEST IN SAFE BIKE AND PEDESTRIAN INFRASTRUCTURE ATTRACT NEW BUSINESSES, BOOST LOCAL RETAIL AND RAISE PROPERTY VALUES. SAFER, MORE CONNECTED STREETS MEAN MORE CUSTOMERS WALKING OR RIDING TO NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPS, AND THEY HELP COMPANIES RECRUIT TALENT THAT EXPECTS MODERN, MULTIMODAL OPTIONS. FINALLY, WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT WHAT KIND OF CITY WE'RE BUILDING. DO WE WANT TO BE A CITY WHERE ONLY THOSE WHO CAN AFFORD A CAR CAN HAVE SAFE, RELIABLE ACCESS TO JOBS AND SERVICES? OR DO WE WANT A DALLAS THAT'S TRULY CONNECTED WHERE EVERY RESIDENT HAS THE ABILITY TO MOVE SAFELY AND WITH DIGNITY. WE CAN'T SAY WE VALUE SAFETY AND EQUITY, THEN TURN AROUND AND CUT THE VERY FUNDS THAT MAKE THEM POSSIBLE. SO I URGE YOU TO URGE ALL OF US TO STAY THE COURSE AND PROTECT THIS INVESTMENT. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MAYOR PRO TEM. I'M SORRY, CHAIRMAN JOHNSON. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT NUMBER SIX. I'LL BE VERY BRIEF. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. AS THE NEW CHAIR OF GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY, I'VE HEARD SOME THINGS. SOME THINGS TODAY THAT'S ALARMING TO ME. THIS IS NOT EFFICIENT. AND SO I WOULD NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS. WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE DOING WHAT'S BEST FOR THE CITY AND SPENDING MONEY ACCURATELY AND BE FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE. [05:20:04] AND SO I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS. THANK YOU. MAYOR PRO TEM RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE AMENDMENT TO AMENDMENT NUMBER SIX. THANK YOU. MAYOR. GUS, HOW MANY ENGAGEMENT PHASES TOOK PLACE AND HOW MANY OVER HOW MANY MONTHS ON THE BLACK PLAN. YES, SIR. OH WE HAD SEVERAL BEFORE WE. THE FINAL AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT WE NEEDED TO MAKE SURE, ESPECIALLY DURING THE LAST MONTHS BEFORE THE ADOPTION ESPECIALLY, WE HAD TARGETED PUBLIC MEETINGS OR OUTREACH, WHETHER BEING IN SPECIFICALLY DISTRICT TWO AND DISTRICT 14 AND DISTRICT 12 AND THE NORTHERN PART AND THE ONE IN DISTRICT EIGHT. SO ALL TO SAY IS WE'VE HAD EXTENSIVE OUTREACH OVER A YEAR ON THE BACK LINE. SO I BELIEVE WE HAD OVER FIVE ENGAGEMENT PHASES TO TO THE BIKE PLAN WITH MULTIPLE FOLLOW UP MEETINGS. THERE'S DO WE KNOW HOW MANY PRIORITY PROJECTS ARE IN PHASE ONE? WE HAVE ALL THE PHASE ONE LAID OUT OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS TO DELIVER THE PROGRAM. HOW MANY SPECIFIC PROJECTS? I DON'T HAVE IT. I LIKE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER MENTIONED IS WE HAVE THE THE LISTING. I CAN PROVIDE IT. BUT IT IS LAID OUT FOR THE DELIVERY OF THE FIRST PHASE. SO IT'S. I BELIEVE IT'S ABOUT A DOZEN PROJECTS. IT'S A LITTLE BIT. I MEAN, IT'S MORE THAN THAT, AND I GUESS, YOU KNOW, TAKING A PERCENTAGE OUT OF THOSE PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED AS PROJECTS THAT NEED TO BE IN PHASE ONE. WHAT QUALIFIES A PROJECT TO BE IN PHASE ONE WAS SAFETY A COMPONENT TO THE SELECTION? YEAH, DEFINITELY. SAFETY WAS ONE COMPONENT BECAUSE WE HAD A CRITERIA ON HOW THE HOW THOSE PROJECTS WERE PRIORITIZED. SO AT THIS TIME YOU WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO TELL US WHICH PROJECTS WOULD BE AFFECTED? I CAN'T BUT LIKE I SAID, WE DO HAVE ALL THE PROJECTS LISTED AND LAID OUT FOR THE DELIVERY OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. MAYOR. CHAIRMAN STEWART, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON THE AMENDMENT TO AMENDMENT NUMBER SIX. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. CITY MANAGER, COULD YOU FIND US SOME MONEY FOR DAS? BECAUSE I DID HAVE I'VE HAD PEOPLE AT MY BUDGET TOWN HALLS ASK THAT WE FIND SOME ADDITIONAL FUNDING. I HAD MY REPRESENTATIVE TO THAT BOARD OR COMMISSION RESIGN BECAUSE OF SOME OF THE FRUSTRATIONS THAT SHE WAS SEEING. SO I HAVE EXPERIENCED THE THE JUST A TINY BIT OF THE STRESS AROUND WHAT IS HAPPENING WITH RESPECT TO THAT PROGRAM. AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT SUGGESTING THEY NEED $2 MILLION. BUT IT SEEMS TO ME FOR THE SPAY NEUTER CLINIC, IF THEY ARE RUNNING OUT OF FUNDS FOR THAT IN APRIL, THAT'S WAY TOO EARLY, BECAUSE THAT IS THE BEST WAY TO KEEP OUR PET POPULATION UNDER CONTROL. SO I WOULD JUST ASK IF YOU COULD DO SOME RESEARCH FOR US AND BECAUSE I JUST READING THE ROOM HERE, I'M WORRIED THAT WE'RE GOING TO COME UP SHORT, PERHAPS, AND NOT BE ABLE TO FIND FUNDING FOR DAS. THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH. COUNCILWOMAN STEWART. AND I THINK THAT IS A GOOD ASSIGNMENT FOR ME. I THINK IT WILL TAKE AWAY A LOT OF THE ANXIETY AND THE STRESS AROUND THIS HORSESHOE RIGHT NOW. AND SO WE WILL DEFINITELY WORK AND BRING BACK THAT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. SEPTEMBER 17TH. THE GOAL WOULD BE TO IDENTIFY A WAY TO DO THAT WITHOUT IMPACTING ANY SERVICES, ANY PRIORITIES, ANY POLICIES AND PLANS THAT THIS BODY HAS ADOPTED. SO LET THAT BE A HOMEWORK ASSIGNMENT FOR ME. THANK YOU SO MUCH. OKAY. I THINK WE'RE BACK TO DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM FOR THREE MINUTES ON YOUR AMENDMENT TO YOUR ORIGINAL AMENDMENT. SURE. AND I THINK AT THIS POINT I JUST WANT TO RAISE THAT WE HAVE 115 MILES OF TRAILS. SO THAT IS SOMETHING THAT BIKE RIDERS CAN USE. AND DO WE KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE USE BIKE LANES IN DALLAS? BECAUSE I LOOKED HIGH AND LOW AND COULD NOT FIND A NUMBER. WE DO NOT HAVE THAT. YEAH. SO WE WE TALK ABOUT HOW BIKE LANES ARE CLOSE TO HOMES WHERE PEOPLE MAY NOT EVEN OWN OR HAVE AN INCLINATION TO RIDE A BIKE. AND SO EVEN THOUGH WE PASS THAT AS THIS MAGNIFIES, I'M SEEING THAT THERE'S SOME ROOM TO GO BACK AS SOME THINGS ARE BROUGHT BACK THIS FALL TO REALLY EXAMINE WHAT WE'RE INVESTING VERSUS WHAT THE ACTUAL USE IS, AND THEN WHAT THAT PROJECTION MIGHT BE FOR THE FUTURE. BUT YOU KNOW, I'M EXCITED TO HEAR ABOUT THE EFFICIENCY SIDE OF THIS, BECAUSE I'D LOVE TO COMPARE WHAT THE EFFICIENCY IS OF AN OVER CAPACITY SHELTER AGAINST BUILDING A NEW SHELTER, ETC.. BUT AND I DIDN'T KNOW THAT PEOPLE WHO ARE COMING TO FIFA ARE GOING TO BRING THEIR BIKES WITH THEM. [05:25:03] THAT WAS NEWS TO ME. BUT ANYWAY, I LIKE THE THE PHILOSOPHY OF ASKING THE CITY MANAGER TO HEAR WHAT WE ALL HAVE A CONCERN ABOUT, BUT AREN'T QUITE SURE HOW TO FUND. AND SO MAYOR I WILL WITHDRAW THE AMENDMENT I MADE AND WITHDRAW THE AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT. IS THERE OBJECTION TO THAT? HEARING NONE SO ORDERED. SO AMENDMENT NUMBER SIX HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN IN ITS ENTIRETY. OKAY. AMENDMENTS NUMBER SEVEN AND NUMBER EIGHT WERE WITHDRAWN BEFORE THE MEETING. IS THERE ANYONE WHO IS INTERESTED IN PUTTING FORWARD AMENDMENT NUMBER NINE IN TODAY'S PACKET? YES. MR. MAYOR, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR A MOTION. THANK YOU. MR. MAYOR, I'M GOING TO HOLD THIS AMENDMENT UNTIL THE 17TH. AND I REALLY JUST KIND OF WANT TO EXPRESS TO MY COLLEAGUES. THEN, THEN THEN WHAT EXACTLY ARE YOU DOING RIGHT NOW? I MEAN, THE ONLY THING WE'RE DOING TODAY IS EITHER PUTTING FORWARD AMENDMENTS OR MOVING ON. SO ARE YOU PULLING IT DOWN OR THERE'S NO. YEAH. THERE'S NO. YEAH. SO DO I JUST NEED TO HOLD IT I'M PULLING IT BACK. OKAY. YOU'RE PULLING IT BACK OKAY. SO AMENDMENT NUMBER NINE HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN. ANYONE WILLING TO FORWARD AMENDMENT NUMBER TEN? YES, SIR. OKAY. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR A MOTION. THANK YOU. THIS AMENDMENT REDUCES THE PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT CONFERENCE FEES AS WELL AS THE PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT. THESE EACH HAVE THEIR OWN OBJECT CODE, AND TOGETHER IT REDUCES THEM 10% OF ONLY THE GENERAL FUND DEPARTMENTS, FOR A TOTAL OF 268,969. AND THAT MONEY IS THEN USED FOR TRANSPORTATION. THAT'S THE MOTION. IT'S BEEN MOVED. AND I HEARD A SECOND CHAIRWOMAN, DO YOU WANT TO BE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON YOUR AMENDMENT? I WOULD YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES? THANK YOU. THE IN YOUR PACKET, AMENDMENT NUMBER TEN. THANK YOU. SO, WHAT WE'VE BEEN TOLD ACROSS THE CITY IS THAT STREET MAINTENANCE IS ACTUALLY THE NUMBER ONE PRIORITY OF OUR RESIDENTS. THIS IS THE FIRST YEAR I RECALL THAT PUBLIC SAFETY WASN'T OVERWHELMINGLY THE NUMBER ONE. I THINK THE PUBLIC REALIZES THAT WE'RE TAKING CARE OF PUBLIC SAFETY, THAT THEY SEE THAT WE HAVE THIS COMMITMENT. AND SO THEREFORE, HERE COMES STREET MAINTENANCE, AND A BUDGET TELLS YOU WHAT YOUR PRIORITIES ARE. PEOPLE CAN TELL YOU WHAT THEY CARE ABOUT. BUT WHEN YOU SEE THE BUDGET, YOU KNOW, AND RIGHT HERE WE NEED TO BE FOCUSING MORE ON STREET MAINTENANCE. THE TRUTH IS, I WOULD HAVE DONE THIS AS A TAX REDUCTION, BUT I DON'T THINK THE BODY HAS A WILL TO DO THAT BECAUSE I ASKED THE PEOPLE WHO I THOUGHT WOULD BE MOST LIKELY, AND I DON'T THINK WE WOULD GET CLOSE TO HAVING THE EIGHT VOTES NEEDED. SECONDLY, I WOULD LIKE TO PUT IT TOWARDS INCREASING THE SALARIES FOR THE POLICE OFFICERS. AGAIN, I DON'T THINK THERE'S THE WILL OF THE BODY FOR THAT, BUT THERE DOES SEEM TO BE A WILL OF THE BODY TO DO THE STREET REPAIR. SO WITH THAT, I WILL TELL YOU THAT OUR PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT CONFERENCE FEES AND PERSONNEL DEVELOPMENT. THIS IS WHERE WE'RE SENDING PEOPLE OFF TO CONFERENCES. WHEN YOU ADD ALL THESE NUMBERS UP TOGETHER, WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT BETWEEN THE TWO CODES IS A GENERAL FUND THAT'S SPENDING $2.689 MILLION ON THIS PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT. THAT'S JUST ON THE GENERAL FUND DEPARTMENTS. THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE THE ENTERPRISE ONES. AND SO THE ENTERPRISE DEPARTMENTS, IT'S ANOTHER 2.1 MILLION. I'M JUST GOING TO SAY IT'S EXCESSIVE. AND AGAIN, THIS IS WHERE WE CAN HAVE SOME FISCAL RESTRAINT WITH NO IMPACT TO OUR RESIDENTS. AND FRANKLY, IT'S NOT MUCH OF AN IMPACT TO THE TO THE EMPLOYEES. BECAUSE AGAIN, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE ENTERPRISE FUNDS, JUST THE GENERAL FUND. AND IT'S ONLY 10% OF THAT. SO AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE IT'S $268,000. AND THAT'S WHAT THE AMENDMENT IS. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST AMENDMENT NUMBER TEN? SEEING NONE, PLEASE SIGNIFY YOUR SUPPORT BY RAISING YOUR PLACARD. SEALS RAISED IN FAVOR COUNCIL MEMBER ROTH, STEWART BLAIR BLACKMON. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM WILLIS. MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO. MAYOR JOHNSON COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN. RIDLEY GRACEY COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN. YES. AND COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON. I DON'T SEE ANYONE VIRTUAL, BUT YOU DO HAVE A MAJORITY RAISED IN FAVOR. MR.. MAYOR COUNTED NINE. SO THE AMENDMENT MOVES FORWARD. AMENDMENT NUMBER TEN. OKAY. AMENDMENT NUMBER 11. ANYONE WANT TO PUT THAT ONE FORWARD? YES. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR A MOTION. THANK YOU. THIS AMENDMENT IS ELIMINATING THE PROPOSED INCREASE IN STAFFING FOR THE OFFICE OF [05:30:05] GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS, AND PUTS THAT FUNDING INSTEAD TO STREET REPAIR. IS THERE A SECOND? IT'S BEEN SECONDED. ANY DISCUSSION, CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN? YES, FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT NUMBER 11. SO AS YOU SAW IN YOUR BUDGET BOOK, THIS ELIMINATES THE ONE POSITION THAT WAS PROPOSED TO BE TRANSFERRED FROM THE CITY MANAGER OFFICE. THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR, WE HAVE 5.6 FULL TIME EQUIVALENTS IN THE OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS. IT'S PROPOSED FOR IT TO BE 6.98. SO IT'S A 1.4 POSITION INCREASE. AS THE CHAIR OF LEGISLATIVE, I'LL JUST TELL YOU, I THINK OUR STAFFING WAS SUFFICIENT. AND THAT'S IN OUR BUSIEST SESSION. I CAN IMAGINE THAT THEY HAVE EXCESS TIME TO BE WORKING ON THINGS WHEN WE'RE NOT IN LEGISLATIVE SESSION, WHICH IS, OF COURSE, MOST OF THE YEAR AND EVERY OTHER YEAR. I UNDERSTAND THIS PROPOSAL TO BE FROM CITY MANAGEMENT TO REALLY FOCUS ON THE COUNTY AND DART. BUT I WILL TELL YOU, I DON'T THINK THAT'S A FULL TIME JOB. AND SINCE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A STAFFING ALREADY OF 5.6, WHICH IS STAFFED BY SIX PEOPLE, I THINK THEY'RE MORE THAN CAPABLE OF HANDLING IT. THE NEXT THING I'M GOING TO SAY IS THAT, AGAIN, THIS IS A WAY TO TAKE CONTROL FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY OF OUR BUDGET WITH NO IMPACT TO OUR RESIDENTS. THERE IS NO TIME. I FELT LIKE ON THE LEGISLATIVE SIDE, WE DIDN'T HAVE THE STAFF CAPABLE AND AVAILABLE TO DO ANYTHING THAT WE WANTED TO. SO WITH THAT, I ASK YOU TO SUPPORT MOVING THE 92,484 AWAY FROM THE ADDITION THAT WAS EXPECTED FOR OGA AND INSTEAD INTO STREET MAINTENANCE. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST AMENDMENT NUMBER 11? SEEING NONE, PLEASE INDICATE YOUR SUPPORT BY RAISING YOUR PLACARD. SEALS RAISED IN FAVOR. COUNCILMEMBER ROTH. MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO MAYOR JOHNSON. COUNCILMEMBER MENDELSOHN COUNCILMEMBER RIDLEY. WITH ONLY FIVE RAISED IN FAVOR. THIS AMENDMENT FAILS. MR. MAYOR. OKAY, THAT WAS AMENDMENT NUMBER 11. IS THERE ANYONE WILLING TO PUT FORWARD AMENDMENT 12? YES, PLEASE. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR A MOTION. THANK YOU. THIS AMENDMENT IS TO TAKE THE CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION IN THE NO NEW REVENUE BUDGET AND CLOSE ALL THE COMMUNITY POOLS AND INSTEAD AND CLOSE THEM ALL IN THIS FISCAL YEAR INSTEAD OF OVER A THREE YEAR APPROACH. THIS WOULD SAVE US AN ADDITIONAL $1,000 AND THAT MONEY WOULD ACTUALLY BE REINVESTED INTO PARKS, HOPEFULLY TO. NO, NO, I NEED YOU TO WHAT THE AMENDMENT DOES NOT NOT DEBATING. OKAY. IT NEEDS TO BE MORE SPECIFIC THAN THAT. SO IT'S A SOURCE AND A USES MOTION FIRST. AND THEN WE CAN HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT. SO WHAT DOES IT DO IF YOU DON'T MIND SAYING. SO WE CAN SEE IF WE CAN HAVE A SECOND. IT FUNDS IN THE PARKS THE HISTORIC BUILDINGS LOCATED AT OLD CITY PARK FOR MAINTENANCE. OKAY. IS THERE A SECOND SECOND. OKAY. IT'S BEEN MOVED IN. SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? YES. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT NUMBER 12. SO IF YOU WERE HERE LAST YEAR, WHAT YOU, YOU KNOW, HAPPENED IS THE PARK BOARD VOTED TO CLOSE ALL THE COMMUNITY POOLS LAST YEAR. AND THAT WAS BROUGHT TO US AND WE DIDN'T DO IT. WE DIDN'T CLOSE A SINGLE ONE. NOW SOME OF THEM SELF CLOSED BECAUSE THEY HAD SUCH SIGNIFICANT MAINTENANCE ISSUES. AND THEY'RE COMING BACK AROUND A SECOND BITE AT THE APPLE. BUT INSTEAD OF COMING BACK AT THE SAME EXACT OFFER, SAME EXACT SUGGESTION TO CLOSE ALL OF THEM, THEY'RE NOW SAYING, OKAY, WELL, IF YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE POLITICAL DECISION OF CLOSING ALL OF THEM, MAYBE YOU COULD DO IT OVER TIME. BUT THE TRUTH IS, WE HAVE TO HAVE THE COURAGE TO DO THE RIGHT THING. AND THERE'S A REASON THEY WANT TO CLOSE THEM. AND IT'S VERY MUCH LIKE OUR LIBRARY CONVERSATION. THEY WANT TO HAVE REGIONAL AQUATIC CENTERS. THERE'S NINE REGIONAL AQUATIC CENTERS. THERE'S 17 SPLASH PADS. THIS WAS BASED ON A MASTER PLAN. SO UNLIKE THE LIBRARY, THIS MASTER PLAN IS FROM 2015. SO ALL THESE YEARS LATER, MORE THAN TEN YEARS LATER, NO COUNCIL HAS HAD THE COURAGE TO ACTUALLY FOLLOW THE MASTER PLAN AND SHUT ANYTHING. AND WE CAN'T JUST KEEP ADDING. WE HAVE TO DO THE HARD PART OF ALSO CLOSING. SO. WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS LOOK IN THE MIRROR AND DECIDE IF WE CAN OR CANNOT MAKE ANY TOUGH DECISIONS. [05:35:05] SO THERE WAS AN EDITORIAL LAST YEAR ASKING THE COUNCIL, WHY ARE YOU ONLY FOCUSING ON THESE COMMUNITY POOLS IN SOUTHERN DALLAS? THERE SEEMS TO BE A REAL EQUITY ISSUE. THAT'S WHAT THEY SAID. TO WHICH I RESPONDED, WELL, SURE. WHY DON'T YOU CLOSE THE COMMUNITY POOL IN DISTRICT 12? OH YEAH. THERE ARE NO POOLS IN DISTRICT 12 AND DISTRICT 12. RESIDENTS HAVE TO GO TO DISTRICT 11 TO THE ONE POOL THAT'S NORTH OF 635. SO OUR DENTON COUNTY RESIDENTS ARE TRAVELING TEN MILES. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO ASK OUR RESIDENTS TO LEAVE A MINDSET THAT EVERY AMENITY FOR THE CITY IS APPROPRIATE IN EVERY SINGLE, SOLITARY NEIGHBORHOOD. IT'S NOT. WE HAVE TO HAVE LIBRARIES AVAILABLE ALL OVER, POOLS AVAILABLE ALL OVER, REC CENTERS ALL OVER, BUT NOT FOR EVERY SINGLE LOCATION. SO THE CONDITIONS AT THESE COMMUNITY POOLS ARE TERRIBLE. SEVEN OF THE NINE ARE OLDER THAN ME, MEANING THEY'RE OLDER THAN 60. A POOL DOESN'T LAST THAT LONG. SO WE HAVE ALREADY HEARD FROM MANY, MANY RESIDENTS ABOUT THIS ISSUE. AND THE QUESTION I WOULD ASK YOU IS, DO YOU REALLY WANT TO DO THIS AGAIN NEXT YEAR? LIKE YOU'VE ALREADY GOTTEN THE NEGATIVE FEEDBACK OF DON'T CLOSE MY POOL. DO YOU REALLY WANT TO DO THIS AGAIN NEXT YEAR? BECAUSE WE WILL HAVE TO CLOSE THEM. THE ONLY OTHER OPTION IS TO DIG THEM UP AND REPLACE THEM WITH A BRAND NEW POOL. AND I HAVEN'T HEARD ANYBODY SAY THAT. SO EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE, WE HAVE SOMEBODY WHO WANTS TO GIVE A QUOTE AS EITHER A BEGINNING OR AN ENDING PART OF THEIR STATEMENT. SO I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU ONE. AND IT'S FROM JOHN F KENNEDY. AND IT SAYS TO GOVERN IS TO CHOOSE TO APPEAR UNABLE TO CHOOSE IS TO APPEAR TO BE UNABLE TO GOVERN. AND I THINK WE HAVE BEEN FACED WITH MULTIPLE DECISIONS TODAY, AND WE WILL AGAIN IN TWO WEEKS WITH ADDITIONAL AMENDMENTS. BUT WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO MAKE A DECISION. AND CONTINUOUSLY KICKING THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD MEANS THAT'S EXACTLY HOW WE GOT HERE WITH OUR BUDGET, AND WE WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO RIGHTSIZE IT TO FULFILL OUR ACTUAL OBLIGATIONS. WE HAVE A LOOMING ADDITIONAL 20 MILLION FOR THE PENSION. GUESS WHAT? THAT'S GOING TO CONTINUE FOR AT LEAST ANOTHER TEN YEARS, WHERE WE WILL CONTINUE TO HAVE TO PUT IN VERY SIGNIFICANT MONEY, MORE POLICE OFFICERS, AND THEY'RE NOT INEXPENSIVE. SO THE BUDGET HAS TO SHIFT, AND AT SOME POINT SOMETHING'S GOING TO GIVE. THERE ARE EASY DECISIONS IN FRONT OF US. POOLS THAT DON'T WORK PROPERLY. REDUCED ATTENDANCE ALREADY. HIGH MAINTENANCE COSTS. WHY WOULD WE WORK ON MAINTENANCE AND CHEMICAL COSTS AND CLEANING THESE POOLS ALL THE WAY TO NEXT SUMMER? WHEN, BY THE WAY, THEY MIGHT NOT OPEN BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT IN GOOD ENOUGH SHAPE. SO THIS IS THE TIME TO RIP OFF THE BAND AID AND SAY IT'S TIME TO CLOSE THEM. LET'S TAKE THAT EXTRA 600,000 AND DO THE WORK WE NEED TO, WHICH IS MAINTAINING OUR OWN CITY ASSETS AND IN THIS CASE, AT OUR NUMBER ONE PARK NUMBER ONE, MEANING OUR FIRST PARK FOR HISTORIC BUILDINGS, WE'RE NEVER GOING TO BE ABLE TO REPAIR IF WE DON'T START TAKING CARE OF THEM. THANK YOU. JEROME STEWART, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. WE'RE ON AMENDMENT NUMBER 12. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I SUPPORT THE CLOSURE OF OF THE REMAINING COMMUNITY POOLS. TEN YEARS AGO, IN 2015, THE PARK BOARD AND CITY COUNCIL MADE THE DECISION TO MOVE AWAY FROM COMMUNITY POOLS AND TOWARDS AQUATIC CENTERS. AND THEY DID ACTUALLY LOOK AT THE NUMBER I HAVE, THE BRIEFING AND THE THE COST FOR DIGGING UP THE OLD POOLS. AT THAT POINT, THE COMMUNITY POOLS AND REPLACING THEM WITH NEW POOLS WOULD HAVE BEEN $58 MILLION. THAT WAS TEN YEARS AGO, BUT IT WAS $52 MILLION TO PUT IN THE AQUATIC CENTERS INSTEAD. SO THAT WAS ONE OF ONE OF THEIR REASONS. SO AFTER REVIEWING THIS 20 AUGUST 26TH, 2015 COUNCIL BRIEFING THAT MADE THIS RECOMMENDATION, I UNDERSTOOD THE MANY REASONS FOR THIS DECISION. BUT THE TWO THAT CAUGHT MY ATTENTION ARE THE COST TO MAINTAIN AND OPERATE THE POOLS, AS WELL AS FOCUSING ON AN INCREASED ATTENDANCE, WHICH COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN MENTIONED. THIS IS THIS WAS A STRATEGIC PLAN. IT STILL IS THE STRATEGIC PLAN, ONE THAT'S BEEN IN PLACE FOR MANY YEARS. I WOULD ASK THAT WE HONOR THE GOOD INTENTIONS OF THIS PLAN AND MOVE FORWARD WITH ITS EFFICIENCY AND GOOD PLANNING. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MR. ROTH, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. AMENDMENT NUMBER 12. THANK YOU. I THINK THE I'M IN SUPPORT OF OF THE AMENDMENT. MY VISION ON THIS IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT. I REALLY THINK THAT THE BENEFIT HERE IS SIGNIFICANT IN RENOVATING AND UPDATING OLD CITY PARK. [05:40:03] I THINK IT'S A TREMENDOUS VENUE. IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO CREATE A TREMENDOUS AMENITY. IT'S IT'LL ATTRACT TOURISTS IN THE UPCOMING EVENTS THAT WE'RE HAVING. I THINK IT'S A GREAT AMENITY FOR THE FOR THE CITIZENS TO BE ABLE TO LOOK AT THEIR HISTORY. I THINK IT'S A TREMENDOUS OPPORTUNITY TO WEIGH IN AND ENCOURAGE THE ENDORSEMENT AND THE PROMOTION OF CULTURE AND ARTS IN OUR CITY. I THINK IT'S A WIN. I THINK WE'RE WE'RE TAKING MONEY FROM A, AN ASSET THAT'S REALLY THAT ARE DEAD AND PUTTING IT INTO SOMETHING TO MAKE IT ALIVE. AND I THINK THIS IS A GREAT OPPORTUNITY. AND I, I THINK I THINK THAT I WOULD CERTAINLY ENCOURAGE EVERYBODY TO VOTE FOR THAT. CHAIRMAN RIDLEY RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT 12. AND THEN I'M GOING TO GET TO YOU, CHAIRMAN WEST, NEXT. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I AM IN SUPPORT OF THIS SOURCE OF FUNDS. I ASKED THE QUESTION LONG BEFORE THIS AMENDMENT WAS CREATED OF OUR PARK DIRECTOR. IF THE PARK BOARD HAD VOTED TO CLOSE THE NINE NEIGHBORHOOD POOLS, WHY WEREN'T THEY IN FAVOR OF CLOSING THEM ALL THIS YEAR INSTEAD OF PROLONGING THE AGONY OF DOING IT OVER A THREE YEAR PERIOD OF TIME? AND I DIDN'T REALLY GET A SATISFACTORY ANSWER, ESPECIALLY NOW THAT I SEE IT WILL COST US $600,000 TO KEEP THESE REMAINING POOLS, THE OTHER SIX IN COMMISSION FOR ANOTHER TWO YEARS WHEN THEIR USAGE IS QUICKLY DWINDLING. NOT MANY PEOPLE USE THESE OLDER POOLS ANYMORE. I'M IN FAVOR OF JUST RIPPING OFF THE BANDIT ANALOGY AND CLOSING THEM NOW, BECAUSE THE PARK BOARD HAS ALREADY ENDORSED CLOSING THEM. IT'S JUST A MATTER OF WHEN. BUT I DO HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR THE PARK DEPARTMENT ABOUT USAGE OF THE FUNDS FOR OLD CITY PARK. WHAT WOULD THEY POTENTIALLY BE USED FOR? AND WOULD THIS BE YOUR HIGHEST PRIORITY IF YOU'RE GIVEN $600,000 IN ADDITIONAL FUNDING, AS OPPOSED TO USING THEM FOR FAIR PARK OR SOME OTHER SIGNIFICANT USE? THANK YOU. CRYSTAL ROSS PARK AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT I'M ACTUALLY GOING TO DEFER THIS TO OUR ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OVER BUDGET, RACHEL BERRY, TO ADDRESS WHAT WE COULD DO AT OLD CITY PARK. SO I'M GOING TO PUNT REAL QUICK. GOOD AFTERNOON. YES. SO FOR RIGHT NOW, WHAT COULD BE USED FOR THE FUNDS FOR OLD CITY PARK? RIGHT NOW WE ARE CURRENTLY FUNDED AS A OUR BUDGET FOR CITY PARK IS BASED ON THE REVENUES THAT ARE EARNED AT CITY PARK. SO RIGHT NOW WE WE HAVE AN APPROPRIATION, BUT WE DO NOT HAVE A FULL BUDGET FOR CITY PARK FOR THE OPERATIONS AND THE MAINTENANCE OF THOSE BUILDINGS. SO WHAT IS THE ANNUAL REVENUE AT CITY PARK? WHAT YOU WHAT ARE YOU OPERATING ON NOW? SO CURRENTLY WE ARE WE'RE OPERATING UNDER THE PREMISE THAT THE REVENUES EARNED WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF THE PARK. RIGHT NOW THOSE REVENUES ARE LESS THAN 100,000 BECAUSE THIS WOULD BE OUR FIRST YEAR OPERATING THAT PARK. A LOT OF THE BUILDINGS WOULD NEED REPAIRS AND ADDITIONAL WORK DONE TO THEM. WE DO HAVE BOND FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR THAT, BUT THAT WOULD NOT BE SUFFICIENT TO RENOVATE THE ENTIRE PARK. THAT WOULD JUST BE A STOPGAP. SO WHAT IS YOUR MAINTENANCE BUDGET ON AN ANNUAL BASIS? ONCE AGAIN, WE'VE JUST NOW TAKEN OVER THAT PROPERTY. RIGHT NOW TO DATE, WE ARE RUNNING AROUND $650,000 FOR JUST THE OPERATION OF THAT PARK. SO IF THIS AMENDMENT PASSES, WOULD THE 600,000 BE AVAILABLE FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS, RENOVATION OF BUILDINGS, OR WOULD YOU HAVE TO SPEND IT FOR OPERATING COSTS? IT WOULD HAVE TO BE SPENT FOR OPERATIONS AND MOSTLY MAJOR MAINTENANCE ITEMS THAT WOULD NOT BE COVERED UNDER THE CAPITAL PROJECTS. OKAY. AND WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER HALF OF MY QUESTION, WHICH IS IF YOU ARE GIVEN AN ADDITIONAL 600,000 THOUSAND FOR THE PARKS PROGRAM. WOULD THIS BE YOUR HIGHEST PRIORITY FOR USAGE OF THAT MONEY? MY HIGHEST PRIORITY USAGE IS MAJOR MAINTENANCE FOR FOR ME. SO I WOULD THINK THAT WOULD BE A HIGH PRIORITY USAGE. HOWEVER, THAT WOULD NOT BE MY DECISION. THAT WOULD BE BASED ON PARK BOARD DIRECTION. OKAY. IS MR. JENKINS AVAILABLE? WHO MIGHT GIVE US A READ ON THAT? [05:45:04] NO, JUST OUR SENIOR DEPUTY DIRECTOR, MISS ROSS. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. MAYOR. MISS BLAIR, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. I'M SORRY, MR. WEST, CHAIRMAN WEST. AND THEN, MISS BLAIR. CAN YOU HEAR ME? MR. WEST, YOU'RE YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT 12, BUT I CAN'T HEAR YOU. YEAH, WE'LL WE'LL COME BACK TO YOU. MISS BLAIR, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. I'M NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THIS. UNLESS WE HAVE A PLAN OF HOW TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE CLOSURE. JUST TO CLOSE A PARK. WELL, I'M GOING TO TALK SPECIFICALLY ABOUT MY PARKING DISTRICT EIGHT. THAT'S DURING THE SUMMER MONTHS. THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT'S CHILDREN HAVE. IS THAT ONE PARK AND THAT POOL. AND TO NOT HAVE A PLAN FOR THEM FOR SOME AQUATIC CENTER OR SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN THEY THEY HAVE NOTHING. SO ALTHOUGH I DO APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT THE POOL NEEDS TO BE CLOSED, BUT NOT TO CLOSE. TO CLOSE IT WITHOUT A PLAN IS. IN MY OPINION, NOT THE APPROPRIATE WAY TO DO THINGS. SO, MISS ROSS, IS THERE A PLAN OUT OF ALL NINE OF THESE POOLS? I KNOW THEY WERE WHEN WE HAD A BRIEFING BEFORE. IT WAS AN ORDER, AND THEY WERE THEY WERE PRIORITIZED BY THE NUMBER ONE THROUGH NINE, AND THAT THERE WAS A TIMETABLE THAT YOU GUYS HAD TO DO THINGS. CAN YOU PLEASE READ READDRESS WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE FOR US? SURE. ABSOLUTELY. SO WHAT WE PRESENTED PREVIOUSLY, THE PARK BOARD RECOMMENDED THAT WE CLOSE THREE POOLS EVERY YEAR, SO WE WOULD HAVE A THREE YEAR CYCLE BEFORE ALL POOLS WERE COMPLETELY SHUT DOWN. AND SO WE WOULD DEFINITELY HAVE TO CONSIDER ADDITIONAL BOND FUNDS TO BE ABLE TO COME UP WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE EITHER A SPLASH PAD, A SPRAYGROUND, OR IF WE WERE GOING TO DO SOME KIND OF AQUATICS FACILITY. WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF COMPLETING THE AQUATICS MASTER PLAN, SO THAT WOULD GIVE US A LITTLE BIT MORE DIRECTION AND GUIDANCE ONTO AS TO WHERE AND HOW WE WOULD REPLACE THOSE FACILITIES. SO WHEN IS THE TIMELINE FOR THE PLAN TO BE MADE AVAILABLE FOR THIS BODY TO APPRECIATE? I BELIEVE IT'S AT THE END OF THIS YEAR. SO AT THE END OF THIS YEAR, YOU WILL HAVE A PLAN FOR ALL NINE PARKS, ALL NINE POOLS TO BE CLOSED. AND THEN WHAT? THANK YOU. WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE ONCE THAT PLAN AS TO WHAT WHAT HOW WHAT WOULD HAPPEN AFTER THE POOL IS CLOSED? IS THAT NOT CORRECT? WE WILL HAVE THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE CONSULTANTS THAT COMPLETED THE AQUATICS MASTER PLAN AT THE END OF THE YEAR. THAT'S CORRECT. WHICH WOULD HAVE GUIDANCE AND DIRECTION AS TO WHAT WE WOULD DO NEXT. OKAY. SO IS IT YOUR IS IT YOUR THOUGHTS OR THE PARK BOARD'S THOUGHT THAT IT WOULD BE THE BEST THING JUST TO CLOSE THEM ALL AT ONCE AND JUST BE DONE WITH IT. THAT IS NOT THE DIRECTION THE PARK BOARD RECOMMENDED FOR US. THEY DID RECOMMEND THREE POOLS THIS YEAR, THREE POOLS NEXT YEAR AND THREE YEARS. THE FINAL YEAR. THREE POOLS. I'M SORRY. THE FINAL YEAR. OKAY. THANK YOU. THAT'S IT. SURE. ALL RIGHT. WE'RE GOING TO GO BACK TO YOU, MR. WEST, FOR FIVE MINUTES. IF YOU'RE READY. LET'S TRY IT AGAIN. THERE YOU GO. ALL RIGHT. OKAY. SO WHAT DISTRICTS WOULD THIS AFFECT? WHERE ARE THE NINE POOLS AT? SURE. WE HAVE POOLS IN ONE. WHERE'S MY GLASSES? SORRY. ONE. TWO. FOUR. FIVE. EIGHT. I'M SORRY. 12475. I SAID THAT I'M SORRY. THIS IS OUT OF ORDER HERE. EIGHT AND SIX. OKAY, AND I APOLOGIZE. YES. 13 OKAY. YES. THAT'S CORRECT. AND SO I COUNCIL MEMBER BOYER ASKED MY QUESTION, I THINK, WHICH IS, IS IF THERE ISN'T A PLAN YET ON WHAT WOULD HAPPEN WHEN THESE ARE SHUT DOWN, BUT WE WILL HAVE THEM FROM WHAT I THINK YOU ANSWERED HER. WE WILL HAVE THE PLAN BY THE END OF THIS YEAR. AND THE PLAN AS FAR AS LIKE, ARE WE GOING TO GET A SPLASH GROUNDS? IS IT GOING TO BE AN AQUATIC CENTER? WHAT? WHAT IS IT GOING TO BE PROPOSED BY THE CONSULTANT? YES. WE WOULD HAVE THAT RECOMMENDATION IN THE MASTER PLAN. RIGHT. RIGHT NOW THERE'S NO PLAN. IT'S JUST IT'S JUST CLOSURE AT THIS POINT. [05:50:06] SO THERE ARE PLANS FOR SPECIFIC POOLS. I'LL SPEAK TO COUNCIL DISTRICT FOUR, BECAUSE I DO KNOW THAT COUNCIL MEMBER MAXIE JOHNSON REDIRECTED SOME FUNDS TO BE ABLE TO DO AN AQUATIC CENTER OVER AT GLENDALE. I KNOW THAT COUNCIL MEMBER CADENA AND COUNCIL DISTRICT SIX HAS PUT IN, PUT ASIDE, HAS SOME BOND FUNDS ASIDE FOR SOME IMPROVEMENTS OVER AT JC ZARAGOZA. BUT AND THEN WE HAVE SOMETHING COMING IN COUNCIL DISTRICT EIGHT FOR SINGING HILLS. BUT THAT'S NOT AN EXISTING COMMUNITY POOL. SO FOR YOU MENTIONED HOW THE PARK BOARD, WHICH IS OUR APPOINTED REPRESENTATIVES, HAD RECOMMENDED A THREE YEAR PHASE OUT OVER TIME OF THE DIFFERENT POOLS. RIGHT. CORRECT. AND THAT'S JUST WHAT'S THE PURPOSE OF THAT? WHY WOULD THEY RECOMMEND A THREE YEAR PHASE OUT? WELL, I THINK THAT THEY WANTED TO BE VERY CONSIDERATE ABOUT HOW IT WOULD IMPACT THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS THAT WERE UTILIZING THE POOLS. AND THEN ALSO, WE HAVE TO HAVE A PLAN IN PLACE TO SHUT DOWN AND CLOSE OUT THE FACILITIES AS WE DO EACH CYCLE. SO WE DON'T WANT TO JUST ABANDON THE THREE AND NOT HAVE A PLAN FOR CLOSING OR REMOVING THOSE POOLS. SO IT MAKES SENSE FROM A STAFF PERSPECTIVE TO PHASE THEM OUT A LITTLE BIT MORE OVER TIME. SO YOU'RE NOT FORCED OVER 12 MONTHS TO CLOSE NINE POOLS, BUT YET YOU INSTEAD HAVE A FEW MORE YEARS TO DO THAT. ABSOLUTELY. MUCH MORE MANAGEABLE. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE WHEN PARK BOARD WAS DISCUSSING THE POOLS THAT WOULD BE CLOSED, WAS THERE AN OPTION TO PHASE OUT SOME OF THE HIGHER ATTENDING COMMUNITY POOLS OVER IN THE LATER YEARS? YES. SO WE WERE USING THE CRITERIA WHICH ADDRESSED THE AGE AND INFRASTRUCTURE, AGE OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE, THE ATTENDANCE, PROXIMITY TO A NEAREST POOL, AND WHETHER OR NOT THAT PARK HAD A DIFFERENT AMENITY ON SITE. AND SO ATTENDANCE WAS A BIG FACTOR AS WELL. SO WE KNOW THAT THERE ARE SOME POOLS, COMMUNITY POOLS, MARTIN WEISS, PLEASANT OAKS THAT DO SUBSTANTIALLY WELL DURING THE SUMMERTIME. SO THAT WOULD BE IN THE LAST CYCLE. THANK YOU FOR THAT. AND I USUALLY DON'T GET DISTRICT SPECIFIC IN THESE KIND OF TALKS, BUT I'M GOING TO TODAY. YOU MENTIONED MARTIN WEISS POOL. WHICH WHICH IS ONE OF THE ONES SLATED FOR CLOSURE. DID DID THE MARTIN WEISS POOL AVERAGE HIGHER DAILY ATTENDANCE THAN ANY OF THE FAMILY AQUATIC CENTERS IN 2025? YES, SIR. THAT'S CORRECT. IT DID. SO IT HAD HIGHER ATTENDANCE THAN HARRY STONE, EXLINE, LAKE HIGHLANDS AND BACHMAN. IT HAD HIGHER. IT HAD HIGHER ATTENDANCE THAN EXLINE FAMILY AQUATIC CENTER. EXLINE AQUATIC CENTER. OKAY. AND IT WAS, ON AVERAGE, ABOUT 183 189 ATTENDEES IN 2025. THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. YEAH. SO I DON'T SUPPORT THIS IMMEDIATE PHASE OUT FOR ALL THE REASONS. THAT WAS JUST SAID CERTAINLY NOT THE POOL IN DISTRICT ONE. I THINK A THREE YEAR PHASE OUT AS RESPONSIBLE FOR MANY REASONS. AND YOU KNOW, THIS POOL IN PARTICULAR SERVES OVER 90% LATINO, LOW INCOME NEIGHBORHOOD. FOR MANY, IT IS THE MAIN SOURCE OF SUMMER RECREATION, AND LOSING THIS POOL WOULD BE A HUGE LOSS FOR D1 NEIGHBORS. I WOULD SUGGEST INSTEAD KEEPING IT OPEN, LETTING US WORK ON A LONGER TERM PLAN, AND KEEPING THIS AMENITY IN PLACE. WHILE WE WORK ON WHAT'S GOING TO COME NEXT FOR THESE IMPORTANT COMMUNITY POOLS? THANK YOU. MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT 12. THANK YOU. MAYOR. DIRECTOR CRYSTAL, THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION. I THINK THAT EVERYONE AROUND THIS HORSESHOE UNDERSTANDS MY LOVE AND COMMITMENT TO PARKS. AFTER SERVING ON THE PARK BOARD FOR MULTIPLE YEARS. BEING PART OF THE AQUATICS MASTER PLAN, I REMEMBER PRECISELY TALKING ABOUT THE DECOMMISSIONING OF OUR COMMUNITY POOLS. AND THIS PROPOSAL INCLUDES A POOL IN DISTRICT TWO. BUT I THINK WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THIS THROUGH A CITYWIDE PERSPECTIVE AND NOT THROUGH A DISTRICT LENS. IT IS GOING TO TAKE POLITICAL COURAGE TO MAKE THESE VERY DIFFICULT DECISIONS DURING THAT MASTER PLAN. THE COUNCIL MEMBER AT THAT TIME AND I UNDERSTOOD THAT THAT WAS THAT WAS THE DIRECTION THAT WE WERE HEADING. SO THAT'S WHY WE INVESTED INTO A SPRAY PARK IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE POOL IN DISTRICT TWO AT GRAY WHEELER. WE ALSO WENT A STEP FURTHER AND INVESTED SOME OF OUR DOLLARS INTO THE BLACKMON MASTER PLAN, BECAUSE WE KNEW THAT, AGAIN, JUST BECAUSE IT'S OUTSIDE DOESN'T MEAN IT'S NOT IN THE DISTRICT, DOESN'T MEAN THAT OUR RESIDENTS AREN'T GOING TO TO USE THOSE POOLS. AND SO AS WE CONTINUE TO MODERNIZE OUR POOLS, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT WE ARE STATING THIS CORRECTLY IS THIS IS NOT CLOSING [05:55:06] COMMUNITY POOLS. THIS IS ABOUT MODERNIZING OUR AQUATIC SYSTEM TO FIT THE NEEDS OF TODAY'S FAMILIES. OUR COMMUNITY POOLS ARE LITERALLY BEING HELD BY BAND-AIDS TODAY. OUR AQUATIC CENTERS IN OUR COMMUNITY POOLS CLOSED DOWN IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SUMMER. SOMETIMES THEY'RE NOT READY TO OPEN AT THE BEGINNING OF THE SUMMER BECAUSE THESE PARTS SOMETIMES WE HAVE TO GO OUT AND MAKE THESE PARKS FIT. THESE POOLS, THESE MATERIALS AND PUMPS. WE CAN NO LONGER JUST GO TO A AQUATIC CENTER AND AND PICK THEM OUT OF A SHELF. SOMETIMES WE HAVE TO DESIGN THESE SYSTEMS IN ORDER TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE COMMUNITY POOLS. AND SO AGAIN, I KNOW THAT IT'S NOT GOING TO BE AN EASY DECISION. ON TOP OF YOU KNOW, THE POSSIBILITY OF MODERNIZING THESE POOLS, THESE DOLLARS ARE GOING TO GO BACK TO REINVESTING INTO PARKS, INTO OUR FIRST CITY PARK. AND THIS COUNCIL HAS SEEN THE NEED FOR INCREASED REVENUE AT THE. CITY PARK. AND THAT'S BECAUSE THROUGH THE BOND, MULTIPLE COUNCIL MEMBERS AND OUR MAYOR PUT DOLLARS INTO OLD CITY PARK SO THAT THE COMMITMENT IS THERE. WE STILL NEED A LOT OF DOLLARS TO GO THERE, BUT I CAN TELL YOU WE KICKED OFF LAST SUMMER AND THIS SUMMER, OUR SUMMER CAMP WITH OUR KIDS, WITH THOUSANDS OF KIDS AT OLD CITY PARK. AND WE RECENTLY HAD OR ABOUT TO HAVE OUR SENIOR GAMES AT CITY PARK. AND SO THIS PARK HAS SEEN THOUSANDS OF NEW RESIDENTS THAT WERE NOT GOING TO OLD CITY PARK BEFORE. AND I THINK THAT I, YOU KNOW, THESE REINVESTMENT OF DOLLARS ARE ONLY GOING TO MAKE OLD CITY PARK MORE ATTRACTIVE. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FIFA AS WELL, MAKING IT A DESTINATION FOR BOTH RESIDENTS AND TOURISTS. AND SO I THINK THAT THIS IS A GOOD MOVE, A GOOD USE AND A GOOD SOURCE. AND SO, MAYOR, I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE RECOMMENDATION THAT COUNCIL MEMBER MIDDLETON HAS PUT FORWARD. THANK YOU. MISS GORDON, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT NUMBER 12. SO IN 2017, WHEN COUNCIL MEMBER NARVAEZ CAME INTO OFFICE DISTRICT SIX WAS LEFT OUT OF THE AQUATIC PLAN. OUR POOLS NEEDED REPAIR. WE DIDN'T EVEN HAVE A ANGELIA IN ENGLISH. THAT'S A WATER HOSE. CM NARVAEZ WAS ABLE TO ADD TWO SPLASH PADS IN A REGIONAL AQUATIC CENTER WITH THE HELP OF DISTRICT TWO. WE INVESTED IN FIXING JC BECAUSE WE HAD TO CLOSE OUR ANITA MARTINEZ POOL. IT WAS EXTREMELY PAINFUL. OUR RESIDENTS WANTED THEIR SWIMMING POOLS. WE WERE ABLE TO ADD A NEW POOL INTO THE 2025 BOND, WHICH IS GOING TO BE AT JC ZARAGOZA. POOLS ARE IMPORTANT AND WE NEED A PLAN IN PLACE BEFORE WE START CLOSING THEM. AS I SAID, D6 IS SCHEDULED TO GET A NEW POOL, BUT WE'VE BEEN THROUGH THIS, AND SO I UNDERSTAND MY COLLEAGUES THAT ARE HAVING TO CONSIDER HAVING THEIR POOLS CLOSED. IT'S A PAINFUL PROCESS, AND IT WOULD DEFINITELY BE BENEFICIAL IF WE HAVE A PLAN IN PLACE BEFORE WE GO THROUGH THAT. THANKS. CHAIRMAN GRACEY, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT 12. THANK YOU. I KEEP HEARING THIS. I'M JUST TRYING TO GET SOME CLARITY. SO FOR THOSE WHO ARE GETTING NEW POOLS, IF THIS AMENDMENT PASSES, THAT MEANS YOU WON'T. THEY WON'T BE GETTING NEW POOLS. IS THAT HOW I'M UNDERSTANDING THIS? NO, THAT'S NOT CORRECT. THAT'S NOT CORRECT. SO SAY CAN YOU REPEAT THAT? SO I'M TRYING TO FOLLOW WHAT'S HAPPENING. I KNOW THERE'S THE THE AMENDMENT IS TO CLOSE THE COMMUNITY POOL, THE COMMUNITY POOLS NOW VERSUS OVER THE NEXT THREE YEARS AND IN DOING SO, DOES THAT MEAN THAT NO OTHER. ARE WE NOT BUILDING ANY MORE POOLS? OKAY. SO THANK YOU. SO KNOW THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT. SO IT MEANS THAT IF WE WERE TO CLOSE THE COMMUNITY POOLS, THERE ARE CERTAIN POOLS THAT WOULD REOPEN IN A COUPLE OF YEARS AFTER THEY'VE HAD NEW CONSTRUCTION. SO THOSE ARE THE POOLS THAT I WAS REFERENCING. OKAY, OKAY. BUT IF WE CLOSE THE COMMUNITY POOLS AND THERE AREN'T FUNDS IDENTIFIED FOR REPLACEMENT OR ANOTHER STRUCTURE TO COME IN, THEN THOSE POOLS WILL BE CLOSED. THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING. YES. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I'M NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THIS FOR, FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS. ONE JUST BECAUSE OF THE VALUE OF COMMUNITY POOLS. AND AGAIN, YOU KNOW, I THINK I JUST SAW SOMETHING SOMEWHERE WHERE THERE WAS SOME NFL PLAYERS WHO JUST NOW LEARNING HOW TO SWIM. AND I HAVE FRIENDS GREW UP WITH JUST NOW LEARNING HOW TO SWIM. YOU KNOW, THEY GO THEIR ENTIRE LIVES NOT REALLY HAVING ACCESS TO A POOL TO EVEN LEARN HOW TO SWIM. AND THAT MATTERS TO ME. I'VE LEARNED AT A VERY EARLY AGE I TAUGHT MY KIDS AT A VERY EARLY AGE BECAUSE IT'S A MATTER OF LIFE AND DEATH, [06:00:05] BECAUSE YOU JUST NEVER KNOW. SO FOR THAT REASON, I'M NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THIS. THANK YOU, MR. BAZALDUA. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT NUMBER 12. THANK YOU. SO CRYSTAL, COULD YOU JUST SPEAK MORE ABOUT WHAT EXACTLY THE $600,000 WOULD DO FOR CITY PARK? WHAT IT WOULD EXACTLY DO? WE HAVE A LOT OF INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS AT CITY PARK, A LOT OF MAJOR MAINTENANCE REPAIRS THAT ARE NEEDED. I CANNOT SPEAK EXACTLY AS TO WHERE WE WOULD BEGIN TO PLACE THOSE FUNDS. IF WE'RE TALKING INFRASTRUCTURE, I KNOW THAT WE HAVE OPERATIONAL NEEDS AS WELL, BUT LET ME CHECK TO MY RIGHT. NO, THAT WAS ABOUT THE ANSWER THAT I EXPECTED. BECAUSE ESSENTIALLY WHAT WE HAVE A DECISION IN FRONT OF US IS TO TAKE FUNDS AWAY FROM AN ACTUAL PLAN TO PUT TO ANOTHER PARK WITH NO ACTUAL PLAN. AND I FOR THAT, I'M ABSOLUTELY NOT SUPPORTIVE OF THIS. I THINK THAT THIS IS A SUPER ON THE FLY DECISION. IT'S A VERY LARGE DOLLAR AMOUNT, OVER A HALF $1 MILLION THAT WE HAVE NOT HAD ANY UNDERSTANDING. OUR PARK BOARD HAS NOT BEEN BRIEFED ON WHAT THAT WOULD BE UTILIZED FOR, AND THAT'S JUST FOR THE USE OF FUNDS, BUT FROM THE SOURCE OF FUNDS, WITHOUT BELABORING A LOT OF THE POINTS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN MADE WE'VE ALREADY BEEN HAVING THESE COMMUNICATION AND CONVERSATIONS WITH OUR CONSTITUENTS ABOUT THE CLOSURES. I KNOW THAT THE BUCKNER TERRACE NEIGHBORHOOD AROUND EVERGLADE PARK HAS EXPRESSED A LOT OF CONCERN FOR LOSING THEIRS. BUT IT'S ONE THAT I KNOW IS NEEDED. AND I KNOW THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BETTER UTILIZE THAT SPACE AT EVERGLADE PARK. AND SO I'VE ALREADY BEEN WORKING WITH MY PARK BOARD REPRESENTATIVE AND AND SEEING HOW WE CAN GET OUT TO THE COMMUNITY TO GET MORE ROBUST INPUT ON WHAT THOSE NEXT STEPS LOOK AS THIS IS PHASED OUT WHICH IS WHAT YOU ALL HAVE PRESENTED AND SUPPORTED BY THE PARK BOARD. I THINK THIS IS A REALLY HALF BAKED IDEA, AND FOR THAT REASON, I'M NOT SUPPORTIVE OF THIS AS A BUDGET ACTION ITEM. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MISS BLACKMON, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT 12. THANK YOU. SO I'M GOING TO I'VE BEEN KEEPING NOTES, AND I'M KIND OF GOING TO TRY TO RECAP THIS. OKAY. WE, THE PARK BOARD OR CITY OF DALLAS OLD CITY PARK CAME BACK WHEN IN OUR PORTFOLIO AND WE ENDED UP MANAGING IT MAY OF 2024. SO MAY OF 2024, CORRECT? OKAY. AND RIGHT NOW, WHAT IS YOUR BUDGET RIGHT NOW GOING INTO 2526, YOUR PROPOSED BUDGET, 120 FOR CITY PARK OR YOU'RE TALKING DEPARTMENT, THE WHOLE DEPARTMENT, 26 526 126. 118. SO ONE 118 MILLION. RIGHT? CORRECT. OKAY. AND YOU HAVE HOW MUCH FOR OLD CITY PARK? BUDGETED. IT'S NOT IN THERE. IT'S NOT INSIDE THE OPERATING BUDGET. SO YOU HAVE NO MONEY IN YOUR $118 MILLION BUDGET FOR OLD CITY PARK. I'M GOING TO PASS IT TO RACHEL BERRY. ONE MOMENT PLEASE. OKAY. SORRY. YES. AS WE TOOK OVER CITY PARK THAT WAS SET ASIDE INTO A SPECIAL FUND. SO ONCE AGAIN, THAT IS WE DO HAVE AN APPROPRIATION, BUT THAT IS SUPPOSED TO BE BASED ON THE REVENUES THAT WE EARN. SO IT'S A REVENUE SWAP. THE REVENUES WILL BE A REVENUE SWAP. YOU TAKE IN A DOLLAR AND YOU PUT A DOLLAR BACK IN. CORRECT. AND YOU NOW PROJECT YOU'RE GOING TO BE IT'S 100. IT'S 100 NEGATIVE THAT YOU'RE GOING TO BE GETTING FOR THIS. SO YOU'RE TELLING ME THAT IN YOUR ENTIRE BUDGET YOU COULD NOT. AND HOW MUCH WOULD IT TAKE TO OPERATE? WHAT'S YOUR O&M? I MEAN, YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE A BUDGET FOR THIS EVEN IF YOU'RE NOT. SO. WELL, I MEAN, SO THIS WAS LIKE I SAID THIS WAS TAKEN OVER. NOT A PLANNED OBVIOUSLY, FOR US TO TAKE OVER THE PROPERTY. SO THIS WAS BUDGETED RIGHT OVER A LITTLE BIT OVER $700,000, I BELIEVE IT WAS 704. BUT ONCE AGAIN, INTO A SPECIAL REVENUE FUND TO SEE IF WE COULD EARN THE MONEY THAT WE NEEDED TO OPERATE THE FACILITY. OKAY. SO YOU IT'S YOU'RE YOU'RE THINKING IT'S ABOUT 700,000 TO OPERATE, BUT YOU DON'T HAVE A BUDGET. THAT WAS THE AMOUNT THAT WE WERE SET FOR, FOR OPERATIONS ONCE AGAIN, SINCE IT WAS NEW FOR US TO OPERATE. THAT WAS WHAT WE HAD SET ASIDE THAT RIGHT NOW WE DO NOT HAVE ALL THE PROGRAMING DONE FOR THAT FACILITY. WE ARE STILL LOOKING AT UPGRADES, MAJOR MAINTENANCE. THERE ARE THINGS LIKE NO CONNECTIVITY THERE. WE'RE STILL LOOKING AT INSTALLING WI-FI, FIBER OPTICS, [06:05:05] THINGS LIKE THAT. SO RIGHT NOW WE'RE STILL IN THAT PHASE OF TRYING TO SET THE PROGRAM UP. OKAY. SO WE'VE HAD THIS FACILITY A LITTLE OVER A LITTLE OVER A YEAR. SO YOU WERE DOING A NEEDS ASSESSMENT EVALUATION. SO YOU DON'T HAVE A PLAN YET. WE ARE WORKING ON A PLAN ON WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE. WE DO NOT HAVE THAT READY YET. ONCE AGAIN STILL WORKING ON TRYING TO DO THE ASSESSMENTS. OKAY. SO THIS MONEY WOULD ESSENTIALLY GO TO O&M. IF YOU HAVE A 700,000 PROJECTED BUDGET AND YOU'VE GOT 100,000 COMING IN WITH TICKETS, AND THIS IS 600. IT'S BASICALLY TO BREAK EVEN IN YOUR $118 MILLION BUDGET. OKAY, CORRECT. OKAY. AND SO I DO KNOW THAT. AND SO BOND MONEY CAN ONLY BE USED FOR FOR THE THE CAPITAL, WHICH YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW THAT YET. CORRECT. SO THAT'S PROBABLY TWO YEARS OUT OF UTILIZING THE BOND. OH, NO. THERE ARE ITEMS THAT ARE UNDER DESIGN RIGHT NOW IN THE BUDGET. OKAY. DO YOU KNOW THOSE? I DON'T KNOW IF I HAVE THOSE WITH ME RIGHT NOW. I KNOW ONE OF THEM IS THE BLOOM HOUSE, BECAUSE THAT ONE IS ALREADY UNDER DESIGN. OKAY, SO BLOOM HOUSE AND COULD BE ANOTHER ONE. OKAY. NOW ON THE AQUATIC PLAN THAT WAS DONE TEN YEARS AGO. CORRECT 2015. CORRECT. OKAY. WHY HAS IT TAKEN THIS LONG TO GET TO THE CLOSURE PART? I MEAN, JUST BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND I MEAN, WE JUST HAD A DISCUSSION ABOUT CLOSING THE LIBRARY, RIGHT? AND YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE THERE'S LIKE ALMOST A SWAP, RIGHT? YOU HAVE A PLAN IN WHICH YOU WE CLOSE ONE THING, BUT WE'RE GOING TO BRING YOU A SPLASH PAD OR A SPRAY PARK OR SOMETHING ELSE BECAUSE IT IT'S A LITTLE SUGAR WITH THE MEDICINE. SO THESE TWO THAT YOU HAVE LAID OUT, YOU'VE GOT THE SUGAR ON TOP OF THAT MEDICINE. RIGHT. OKAY. I DON'T THINK I'M UNDERSTANDING YOU. ARE YOU GOING TO GIVE THEM THERE'S SOMETHING IN PLACE OF IT FOR CLOSE THEIR SWIMMING POOL. BUT YOU'RE GOING TO GET X OR Y, CORRECT? CORRECT. THEY WOULD GET A SPLASH PAD OR A SOME KIND OF A SPLASH FEATURE. BUT THAT IS ALL BASED ON THE MASTER, THE SECONDARY MASTER PLAN THAT WE HAVE NOT COMPLETED THAT WILL BE COMING AT THE END OF THE THIS THIS YEAR. SO YOU HAVE A SECONDARY MASTER PLAN, AN UPDATE TO THE ADOPT AN UPDATE TO THE AQUATICS MASTER PLAN. CORRECT. AND THESE POOLS IN THE FIRST 11.0 ARE SCHEDULED TO CLOSE. BUT THE THE THE ONE WHAT COMES IN BEHIND IT IS GOING TO BE IN THE 2.0. SURE. IF YOU WANT TO SAY 2.0, BUT THE 2.0 WAS SPECIFICALLY LOOKING AT THOSE COMMUNITY, THOSE LEGACY POOLS, LOOKING TO SEE WHAT WE COULD DO. SO THAT WAS THAT. THAT PLAN IS TO LOOK SPECIFICALLY AT WHAT COULD BE DONE. SO ARE YOU SAYING THAT THE FIRST ONE REALLY DIDN'T ADDRESS WHAT WOULD COME INSTEAD OF THE LEGACY POOLS THAT THEY CLOSED IT? IT DOES ADDRESS THAT. BUT I MEAN, THERE WAS SOME POLITICAL, OF COURSE, PUSHBACK ON WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE OR WHAT THAT MIGHT BE. ONCE AGAIN, NOBODY EVER WANTS TO CLOSE, RIGHT? RIGHT. AND AND OF COURSE, YOU HAVE TO CONSIDER THAT SOME OF THE POOLS HAD NOT BEEN COMPLETED. THE AREA, LIKE SINGING HILLS IS STILL ONE OF THE POOLS THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE COMPLETED IN THE AREA. OKAY. SO THERE WERE STILL SOME OUTLIERS THAT WERE NOT DONE. GOT IT. THERE WAS SOME UNKNOWNS THAT YOU WERE STILL FILLING IN. AND SO DURING THE PARK BOARD DISCUSSION, DID THEY FEEL THAT THIS PHASED APPROACH WOULD HELP EASE THE TRANSITION? THE IN HELPING WITH THE COMMUNITIES UNDERSTAND THE THE MOVEMENT OF HOW THESE POOLS WILL CLOSE AND SOMETHING ELSE WILL COME? YES IT DOES. AND IT STILL GIVES US TIME TO FINISH THE THE MASTER PLAN THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT NOW FOR THE COMMUNITY POOLS TO SEE WHERE WE STAND, AND OF COURSE, TO SEE IF THERE ARE ANY OTHER FUNDS AVAILABLE TO DO THOSE. YOU KNOW, SPLASH PADS IS WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT. OKAY. AND I GUESS THOSE, THOSE COULD BE DONE WITH BOND MONEY. CORRECT? CORRECT. OKAY. THANK YOU. LET'S SEE HERE. I'M GOING TO GO TO CHAIRMAN JOHNSON NOW FOR FIVE MINUTES, AMENDMENT NUMBER 12. THANK YOU. MAYOR JOHNSON. I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS AMENDMENT. I ALREADY HAVE AN OLD AQUATIC CENTER IN DISTRICT FOUR, AND I MISS CRYSTAL. CAN YOU COME TO THE MIC FOR ME, PLEASE? THIS HAS BEEN AN ONGOING ISSUE IN DISTRICT FOUR. PRIOR TO ME BECOMING AN ELECTED OFFICIAL. SO AS SCHOOL BOARD TRUSTEE AND NOW AS CITY COUNCIL THE PROBLEMS THAT WE HAD CONCERNING GLENDALE THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IN THE COMMUNITY STATEMENTS AND LETTERS THAT CAME FROM INSIDE HER, DEALING WITH THE RACISM AND WHY WE KEPT THIS PARK. WHAT WE CONSIDERED THE BLACK WAS CONSIDERED THE BLACK PARK IN OUR COMMUNITY. [06:10:01] AND SO I CANNOT SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT BECAUSE IT IS AGAINST EVERYTHING THAT WE FOUGHT FOR IN OUR COMMUNITY. WHEN I'M LOOKING AT THE PARKS THAT WE JUST CREATED IN DISTRICT FOUR JUST TO GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE OF THE SOUTH OAK CLIFF RENAISSANCE PARK ON OVERTON ROAD ACROSS FROM SOUTH OAK CLIFF HIGH SCHOOL. ONCE THAT PARK WAS CREATED AND THAT BLACK WAS REMOVED, CRIME CAME DOWN BY 50%. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. SO NOW THAT WE'RE BRINGING PARKS, THAT'S THAT'S CREATING OPPORTUNITY AND GETTING RID OF OUR POSITIONS IN DISTRICT FOUR. WE CANNOT GO BACKWARDS. I PROMISE TO CLEAN UP DISTRICT FOUR WITH THE COMMUNITY. WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT BUILDING THE COMMUNITY WITH THE COMMUNITY, WE HAVE TO CLEAN UP DISTRICT FOUR, SO WE CAN'T GO BACKWARDS AND ALLOW THIS TO HAPPEN. I'M WORKING VERY CLOSELY WITH MY COLLEAGUE COUNCILMAN GRACEY, AND WE JUST HAD A BIG COMMUNITY MEETING AT FOUR OAK CLIFF DISCUSSING THE GLENDALE PARK AND THE, THE THINGS THAT'S GOING TO BE PRESENTED IN THAT, IN THAT PARTICULAR PARK, WHAT WE CALL A MASTER PLAN FOR GLENDALE PARK. NOW, I WILL SAY, PRIOR TO ME BECOMING AN ELECTED OFFICIAL HERE AT CITY COUNCIL, THAT PARK WAS GOING TO CLOSE. IT WAS NOT GOING TO HAVE ANYTHING. AND THEREFORE WE GOT IN HERE AND STARTED WORKING VERY QUICKLY BECAUSE WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE VOICE OF THE COMMUNITY WAS HEARD. SO WE'RE GETTING A NEW AQUATIC CENTER, AND WE'RE WORKING AGAIN VERY CLOSELY WITH COUNCILMAN. GRACEY BECAUSE HE ALSO HAS, I THINK, IN DISTRICT THREE, THE OTHER SIDE, A HUGE SIDE OF THE GLENDALE PARK, WHICH WE HAVE EVERY YEAR, THE SOUTH OAK CLIFF CLIF ALUMNI HOST A MAJOR EVENT AT THAT PARTICULAR PARK. AND SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, AND WITH THE NEW AQUATIC CENTER THAT WE'RE HAVING, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR COMMUNITY KNOWS THAT WE HAVE BEEN WORKING VERY HARD TOGETHER. WE'VE MET IN OUR COMMUNITY. YOU'VE MET WITH ME IN MY OFFICE TO DISCUSS THE VOICE OF OUR COMMUNITY IN DISTRICT FOUR, CONCERNING THIS PARTICULAR PARK AND OTHERS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO RIGHT NOW IN DISTRICT FOUR. SO I WANT TO MAKE THAT KNOWN THAT WE ARE IN SUPPORT OF PARKS. WE'RE IN SUPPORT OF THE NEW AQUATIC CENTER THAT'S BEING DONE IN DISTRICT FOUR THAT WE THOUGHT WOULD NEVER GET DONE. AND AGAIN, THANKS TO MY COLLEAGUE HERE AND MR. JENKINS, SENATOR WEST, AND THOSE THAT WERE A PART OF THIS MOVEMENT THAT WE'RE DOING, THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO CALL IT, THE MOVEMENT THAT WE'RE DOING TO RIGHT OR WRONG, AND MAKE SURE THAT WE BRING THOSE KIND OF RESOURCES TO DISTRICT FOUR. SO I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS AMENDMENT, BUT THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT AND THANK MY COLLEAGUE COUNCILMAN GRACEY FOR WORKING WITH US TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN. THANK YOU. OKAY, LET'S SEE HERE. YES. THE DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU MAYOR. SO THERE'S NO DOUBT THAT WE NEED A NEW MODEL FOR OUR OLD COMMUNITY POOLS. AND I APPRECIATE THAT THE PARK BOARD IS TAKING THIS ON, AND THAT STAFF IS GOING BACK AND REVISITING THAT PLAN FROM 2015. AND I'VE HEARD IT VOICED, AND I SHARE THE CONCERN ABOUT CLOSING POOLS IN A WHOLESALE FASHION WHEN WE'VE GOT A PLAN COMING IN THE FALL TO HELP TRANSITION, BECAUSE MY GREATEST FEAR IS TELLING NEIGHBORS WHO HAVE GONE THROUGH A REPAIR LAST YEAR WHEN THE POOL WAS CLOSED ALL SUMMER, WHICH, BY THE WAY, WOULD HAVE BEEN A GREAT TIME TO CLOSE THE POOL IF WE WERE GOING TO DO IT, BECAUSE THAT COULD HAVE BEEN EXPLAINED VERSUS SPENDING THEIR MONEY TO REPAIR IT AND THEN TURNING AROUND AND CLOSING IT. AGREED. SO THEN WE COME BACK AND I FEEL LIKE I'VE VOICED WITHIN THE PAST TWO WEEKS HERE, VERY BIZARRE HOURS, LIKE CALLING FRIDAY A WEEKEND. I THINK THE WORKING PUBLIC WOULD BE THRILLED TO KNOW THAT THEY DON'T HAVE TO GO TO WORK ON FRIDAY BECAUSE IT'S THE WEEKEND, BUT THAT'S NOT THE CASE. AND SO WHEN I SAW THIS LIST, WHICH I BELIEVE IT'S DECIDED OR WHAT'S RECOMMENDED IN THE BUDGET IS JUST TO CLOSE TWO THIS YEAR. SO WHEN I SAW THAT WALNUT HILL REC WOULD BE COMING UP NEXT, I PUT OUT THE WORD TO NEIGHBORHOODS TO SAY, OH, HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT THIS? WOULD YOU USE IT? AND THE WHOLE THEY'VE JUST BEEN PUZZLED. WE DON'T KNOW WHEN IT'S OPEN. WE SEE PEOPLE THERE SOMETIMES, BUT THEN OTHER TIMES WE DON'T. AND I GO BY AND IT'S NOT IT'S NOT OPEN. SO I'D LIKE TO GIVE THEM A CRACK AT THAT UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE IS A GREATER PLAN TO COME. SO I FEEL LIKE WE'VE KIND OF DRIVEN ATTENDANCE DOWN AS IF IT WERE A MISSION. AND I'D LIKE TO AT LEAST GIVE THOSE NEIGHBORS WHO LIVE AROUND THERE AN OPPORTUNITY TO ENJOY IT ON A WEEKEND AS WE WOULD HAVE INTENDED. SO ESPECIALLY AFTER JUST HAVING PAID FOR SOME REPAIR WORK YOU KNOW, OLD CITY PARK HAS A CONSERVANCY. IT HAS A NONPROFIT THAT WE'VE THEY'VE RELINQUISHED THEIR OPERATIONS DUTIES, BUT THEY HAVE COMMITTED I MEAN, THEIR THEIR MISSION IS TO ADVOCATE FOR AND PROVIDE SUPPORT TO OLD CITY PARK SO VISITORS CAN CONNECT WITH THE PAST, INSPIRE THE FUTURE, AND CELEBRATE DALLAS RICH DIVERSITY IN DALLAS FIRST AND OLDEST PARK. [06:15:05] SO I THINK THAT WE'VE GOT A GROUP THAT WE DON'T ACTIVELY ENGAGE AND CULTIVATE. WE CAN'T JUST TREAT THEM LIKE THE ENDOWMENT THEY'RE SITTING ON AND THE FUNDS THEY ARE SITTING ON, WHICH ARE INTENDED FOR SUPPORTING THIS PARK, ARE JUST OURS TO REQUEST VIA EMAIL. I THINK WE NEED TO WORK WITH THEM IN A BETTER WAY. SO I HOPE THAT I CAN GET THAT COMMITMENT. BUT I ALSO KNOW THAT THIS WEEK I BELIEVE ON THE AGENDA THE PARK BOARD IS CONSIDERING THE STIPEND SITUATION THAT WE'VE GOT WITH SOME NONPROFITS, WE'VE GOT SOME VERY WELL FUNDED, WELL-RESOURCED NONPROFITS THAT RECEIVE A STIPEND. MAYBE IT'S TIME TO REEVALUATE THAT AND LOOK AT OLD CITY PARK THAT IS BELOVED AND HISTORIC AND NEEDS SOME LOVE. SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE THAT THE STAFF BRING THAT TO THE GROUP SO THEY CAN LOOK AT THOSE STIPENDS AS A BODY AND SAY, WHERE ARE WE REALLY HELPING AND WHERE WOULD THIS BE A BIG PERCENTAGE OF THE BUDGET AND WHERE IS IT? WHERE IS IT NOT REALLY A DROP IN THE OCEAN. SO I KNOW THAT GOING BACK TO THE CONSERVANCY, DURING THAT BREAKUP OF OPERATIONS AND ALL OF THAT, IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN YOU KNOW, SOME, SOME HARD FEELINGS AROUND THAT. BUT I REALLY HOPE THAT WE CAN MAKE UP BECAUSE I THINK IT'S GOING TO HELP US CLOSE SOME OF THIS OPERATIONAL GAP. AND WHEN IT COMES TO THE AMENDMENT AND TAKING FROM AQUATICS AND MOVING TO ANOTHER PARK, I THINK AQUATICS NEED TO STAY IN AQUATICS. I MEAN, THAT'S WHAT OUR RESIDENTS EXPECT. IF WE'RE WE'RE TAKING THAT AND WE HAVE A NEW PROMISE OF A NEW PLAN. I'M EXCITED TO SEE WHAT THAT IS AND WHAT THAT POOL MIGHT MORPH TO SOMEDAY. BUT I JUST WANT TO NOT TAKE THAT AWAY BEFORE OUR RESIDENTS HAVE A CLEARER PICTURE OF WHERE WE'RE GOING. THANK YOU. MR. RESENDEZ RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT 12. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. CLOSING EVERY COMMUNITY POOL IN A SINGLE YEAR IS NOT WHAT OUR RESIDENTS WANT. THIS WAS NOT REFLECTED IN ANY OF MY BUDGET TOWN HALLS. WHAT I HEARD FROM PEOPLE OF DISTRICT FIVE WAS THAT THEY RELY ON THESE POOLS. UNLIKE OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY, I DON'T REPRESENT A DISTRICT WHERE AN OVERWHELMING NUMBER OF HOMES HAVE PRIVATE POOLS. THE POOL IN DISTRICT FIVE IS HEAVILY USED NOT JUST FOR RECREATION, BUT AS A SAFE, SUPERVISED PLACE FOR OUR KIDS TO TAKE THAT AWAY ALL AT ONCE WITHOUT A PHASED PLAN WOULD BE A REAL DISSERVICE TO COMMUNITIES LIKE MINE. I UNDERSTAND THE NEED TO MODERNIZE, BUT MODERNIZATION SHOULDN'T COME AT THE EXPENSE OF ACCESS. A PHASED APPROACH, GIVES RESIDENTS TIME TO ADJUST, GIVES US TIME TO EXPAND ALTERNATIVES, AND SHOWS THAT WE'RE LISTENING TO THE PEOPLE WE SERVE. AN ABRUPT SHUTDOWN DOES NOT. NONE OF THAT. AND I'VE HEARD A COUPLE PEOPLE THROW OUT THE THE PHRASE OR THE TWO WORDS POLITICAL COURAGE. BUT POLITICAL COURAGE IS NOT ABOUT MAKING THE FASTEST, FASTEST OR THE HARSHEST CUT. REAL COURAGE IS STANDING UP FOR FAMILIES WHO DON'T HAVE PRIVATE POOLS, WHO DEPEND ON THESE FACILITIES AND WHO WHO WILL BE LEFT WITH NOTHING IF WE CLOSE THEM ALL AT ONCE. A PHASED APPROACH IS NOT ABOUT AVOIDING TOUGH DECISIONS. IT'S ABOUT MAKING RESPONSIBLE ONES, RIPPING, RIPPING AWAY A SERVICE THAT SO MANY CHILDREN AND FAMILIES USE EVERY SUMMER. ISN'T COURAGE, IT'S ABANDONMENT. LEADERSHIP IN THIS CONTEXT MEANS BALANCING MODERNIZATION WITH ACCESS AND MAKING CHANGES IN A WAY THAT REFLECTS THE NEEDS AND THE VOICES OF OUR COMMUNITIES. PLEASE REJECT THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT AND INSTEAD PHASE THE CLOSURES RESPONSIBLY, IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE RESIDENTS WHO DEPEND ON THESE POOLS THE MOST. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. I THINK WE'RE TO ROUND TWO. CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU. AMENDMENT 12. MISS ROSS. LAST YEAR, DID THE PARK BOARD VOTE TO CLOSE ALL NINE POOLS? THEY DID NOT. THEY'VE NEVER VOTED TO CLOSE ALL THE POOLS. THEY DID NOT. THEY ACTUALLY RECOMMENDED A REDUCED SCHEDULE FOR LAST SUMMER. CITY MANAGER, DID WE HAVE JOHN JENKINS COME HERE AND TELL US TO CLOSE NINE POOLS? THAT WAS. STAND RIGHT THERE AND TELL US TO CLOSE NINE POOLS. THAT WAS THE DIRECTOR'S RECOMMENDATION. I THINK THAT WHAT YOU'RE PROBABLY REFERRING TO, COUNCILWOMAN MENDELSOHN, IS DURING THE CONVERSATION LAST YEAR AROUND THE BUDGET, AND WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT SOME OF THE WAYS THAT WE WOULD NEED TO REALLY THINK ABOUT THE FUTURE OF OUR POOLS. I THINK WHAT WE HEARD THE DIRECTOR SAY IS THAT WE KNOW THAT IT'S BECOMING MORE AND MORE DIFFICULT EVERY SINGLE YEAR TO CONTINUE WITH THE CURRENT, PROGRAM AROUND THE COMMUNITY POOLS, AND THAT IF WE REALLY WANTED TO BEGIN TO MOVE TO A NEW MODEL THAT CLOSING THE POOLS, ALL THE POOLS WOULD BE THE MOST FEASIBLE APPROACH AND THEN BE ABLE TO WORK ON ACTUALLY THE IMPLEMENTATION. I THINK OF WHAT WAS IN THE AQUATICS MASTER PLAN, BUT IT WAS REALLY ABOUT IF THIS WAS A WAY THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE TO CONTINUE TO KICK THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD, I THINK IS WHAT YOU HEARD FROM THE PARK BOARD, I MEAN, FROM THE PARK DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THE PARK BOARD THEN MADE A FORMAL DECISION TO THEN CLOSE THEM ALL. I THINK THAT THAT WAS PART OF THE COMMENTARY THAT WE HEARD FROM THE DIRECTOR. [06:20:07] MY RECOLLECTION IS THAT HE DID. I WILL DEFINITELY GO BACK AND CHECK, AND I WILL ADMIT THAT SOMETIMES PRIVATE CONVERSATIONS MELD WITH THE PUBLIC ONES, BUT I DO BELIEVE THIS IS THEIR INTENT. AND CRYSTAL, WOULD YOU SAY YES OR NO? IT'S A FACT THAT ALL OF THESE POOLS ARE GOING TO CLOSE. I CAN HEAR THESE POOLS WILL ALL CLOSE. IS THAT A FACT? EVENTUALLY. YEAH. AT SOME POINT SOME OF THEM THIS YEAR AND SOME OF THEM NEXT YEAR AND SOME THE NEXT YEAR AFTER. SO THE RECOMMENDATION IS THREE THIS YEAR, THREE NEXT YEAR AND 3 IN 2028. THAT IS CORRECT. SO SOME OF THE PEOPLE LITERALLY SITTING HERE SAYING NO I GOTTA PROTECT MY POOL. THEIR POOL MIGHT BE CLOSING THIS YEAR ANYHOW. CORRECT. THAT ANSWER WOULD BE CORRECT BECAUSE AT THIS POINT I THINK THAT THERE'S CRITERIA THAT HAS BEEN DEVELOPED THAT'S BEEN SHARED WITH THE PARK BOARD. AND FROM MY CONVERSATIONS WITH THE PARK DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR, THAT CRITERIA WILL BE USED. AND SO THE ANSWER WILL BE YES, IT COULD POTENTIALLY BE SOME OF THE EXACT ONES THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY. SO I HAD A CONVERSATION WITH SOMEONE WHO DESCRIBED THESE POOLS AS A MONEY PIT. AND HERE'S SOME OF THE ITEMS THAT THEY DESCRIBED AS BEING PROBLEMATIC WITH THE POOLS, THAT THE SHELLS OF THE POOL WERE CRACKED OR BROKEN, THAT THE DESIGN OF THE POOL WAS NOT ATTRACTIVE TO KIDS BECAUSE IT'S BASICALLY A RECTANGLE, THAT THERE'S ADA COMPLIANCE ISSUES, THAT THERE'S FOUNDATION ISSUES, ELECTRICAL RISKS, PIPE AND DRAIN PROBLEMS, PUMPS AND FILTERS AND WATER LOSS THAT'S LEAKING INTO THE SOIL. IS THAT ARE ANY OF THOSE TRUE OR NOT TRUE? YES, TRUE. THEY'RE ALL TRUE. SEVERAL. THESE ARE VERY OLD FACILITIES. SO IT'S NOT A SECRET, RIGHT? YOU TALKED ABOUT THE AGE OF THE FACILITIES. OUR YOUNGEST POOL TURNED 50 THIS YEAR. SO WE ARE FACED WITH SIGNIFICANT CHALLENGES. AND SO ALTHOUGH WE MAY HAVE A RECOMMENDED SCHEDULE, SOME OF THESE POOLS MAY GO OUT OF COMMISSION JUST BASED ON THE CONDITION OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE. WHAT'S THE AVERAGE LIFESPAN OF A POOL? 15 TO 20 YEARS. 15 TO 20 YEARS. AND THE YOUNGEST ONE IS 50 AND SOME ARE OVER 70. THAT IS CORRECT. MOST OF THEM ARE OVER 60. SEVEN OF THE NINE ARE OVER 60 YEARS OLD. CORRECT. THIS IS A COMPLETE LOST CAUSE. THIS IS LITERALLY A MONEY PIT, AND WE ARE CONTRIBUTING TO THAT MONEY PIT FOR POLITICAL CONVENIENCE. AND THAT IS A FACT. SO THE NEXT THING I JUST WANT TO SAY IS WITH OLD CITY PARK, THE CITY PARKS DEPARTMENT KNEW IN ADVANCE THAT THE NONPROFIT, THEY GAVE THEM A YEAR'S NOTICE SAYING THEY WERE GOING TO TRANSITION IT BACK TO THE CITY. CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. AND OVER THAT TIME, DIDN'T THE CITY EVALUATE THE BUILDINGS? SO YES, WE COMPLETED THE. THERE WAS A PHYSICAL ASSESSMENT THAT WAS DONE ON THE FACILITIES. YES. AND ISN'T IT THE ISSUE THAT YOU ARE NOT SET ON YET IS WHAT BUILDINGS YOU'LL KEEP AND WHICH ONES YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO LET GO BECAUSE THEY'RE SO FAR GONE IN DETERIORATION. THOSE ARE SOME OF THE DISCUSSIONS THAT WE'RE HAVING. THAT'S CORRECT. AND THIS MONEY WOULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO EITHER KEEP MORE OF THOSE BUILDINGS OR PUT IN THE WEATHERING MEASURES. SO AT LEAST WATER PENETRATION STOPS COULD BE OKAY. WELL, $600,000, I'M JUST GOING TO TELL YOU IS ESSENTIALLY, I MEAN, WHAT'S THE ROOF COSTING FOR THE BLUMHOUSE? ROOF COST 500. 500,000? YEAH. SO BASICALLY, IT'S ONE MORE BUILDING WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO SAVE. AND FOR ALL THE PEOPLE WHO SIT AROUND HERE TALKING ABOUT HISTORIC PRESERVATION, THIS IS OUR HISTORY. IT'S OUR CITY'S SHARED HISTORY. AND IT'S KIND OF YOUR LAST CHANCE TO DO IT. THANK YOU. MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU. MAYOR. THE REALITY IS THAT WE'VE KNOWN THAT THIS DAY IS COMING EVERY YEAR SINCE 2015. COUNCIL MEMBERS HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO INVEST BOND DOLLARS INTO AQUATICS OR INTO PARKS. THIS PAST BOND CYCLE KNOWING THAT THIS DAY WAS COMING EVEN USING ARPA DOLLARS, WE INVESTED ARPA DOLLARS TO BRING IN A, A SPRAY PARK BECAUSE THERE WAS A GAP IN 2015 MASTER PLAN. HOW MANY AQUATIC CENTERS WERE IMPLEMENTED IN THE MASTER PLAN? 2015 WE DID TEN NINE NINE, NINE. AND HOW LONG DID IT TAKE TO IMPLEMENT THOSE PROJECTS? [06:25:04] WE COMPLETED THE LAST ONE LAST 2020 3RD AUGUST OF 2023. OKAY, SO THAT'S EIGHT. THAT'S A LONG TIME. I'M DOING THE MATH IN MY HEAD, BUT MY POINT IS, IS IF WE WERE TO WE HAVE NINE COMMUNITY POOLS. IF WE WERE TO PHASE THOSE OUT UNTIL A NEW PROJECT CAME ONLINE, WHEN WOULD WE COMPLETE THE NINE COMMUNITY POOLS? IF THE NEW MASTER PLAN DIRECTED US OR SUGGESTED RECOMMENDED THAT WE REPLACE ALL NINE WITH POOLS, WE'RE STILL PROBABLY TALKING ABOUT THE SAME TEN YEAR SPAN. SO WE ARE GOING TO CONTINUE HAVING THIS CONVERSATION FOR ANOTHER TEN YEARS, KEEPING THESE POOLS OPEN. IT COULD BE A CONVERSATION THAT WE WOULD HAVE ONCE AGAIN. OKAY. AND THEN WHAT? YEAH. THAT'S IT. THANKS, MAYOR. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST AMENDMENT 12? SEEING NONE. IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR OF IT, SHOW YOUR PLACARD. SEALS RAISED IN FAVOR. COUNCIL MEMBER. ROTH. COUNCIL MEMBER STEWART. MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO MAYOR JOHNSON. COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN. COUNCIL MEMBER. RIDLEY. WITH ONLY SIX RES IN FAVOR OF THE AMENDMENT FAILS, MR. MAYOR. OKAY, THAT WAS AMENDMENT 12. IS THERE ANYONE WILLING TO PUT FORWARD AMENDMENT 13? YES, CHAIRWOMAN. YOU RECOGNIZED FOR A MOTION. OKAY. LUCKY 13. THIS IS GOING TO BE THE LEAST POPULAR AMENDMENT, I BELIEVE. AND WHAT IT DOES IS IT REDUCES ONE STAFF POSITION IN EACH OF THE 14 CITY COUNCIL OFFICES AND USES THOSE FUNDS, WHICH IS $1.19 MILLION FOR STREET MAINTENANCE. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND? IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. ANY DISCUSSION, CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN? YES. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT 13. TWO YEARS AGO, WITH LITTLE OR NO DISCUSSION. THE CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZED AN ADDITIONAL STAFF MEMBER FOR EACH CITY COUNCIL OFFICE, MEANING 14 NEW EMPLOYEES. PLEASE NOTE THAT THERE WERE NO NEW DUTIES ASSIGNED TO THE COUNCIL MEMBERS, JUST A 33% INCREASE IN STAFF. THIS AMENDMENT RETURNS THE STAFFING LEVEL TO THE PREVIOUS TWO SUPPORT PERSONNEL PER COUNCIL OFFICE. SOMEHOW, ALL CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS USED TO BE ABLE TO DO THIS JOB WITH JUST TWO STAFF MEMBERS. THIS IS A LUXURY WE CAN'T AFFORD. I WOULD POINT OUT THAT SOME COUNCIL MEMBERS CHAIR MULTIPLE COMMITTEES, WHILE SOME CHAIR NONE BUT ALL OF THE COUNCIL OFFICES ARE STAFFED THE SAME WHEN THE WORKLOAD IS CLEARLY DIFFERENT. CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS CAN ACCOMPLISH THEIR POSITION WITH JUST TWO STAFF AS IT HAS BEEN DONE FOR DECADES PRIOR TO OUR SERVICE. WHILE THE CHANGE IS DIFFICULT POLITICALLY AND IMPACTS THE CITY COUNCIL DIRECTLY, IT SHOWS THE SERIOUSNESS OF OUR COMMITMENT TO PROVIDING AN EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT TO OUR RESIDENTS. OKAY, MISS BLACKMON, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT 13. THANK YOU. I'D ACTUALLY LIKE TO CORRECT YOU AS 1.5. WHEN I WAS HERE WITH LEOPARD IN 2007 THEY SHARED A SECRETARY. I THINK YOU ALL REMEMBER THAT. AND I THINK THE MAYOR'S OFFICE, WE HAD THREE AND A HALF PEOPLE. YEAH, IT WAS LONG DAYS, AND I TEND TO AGREE WITH THIS, BUT AFTER TALKING TO SOME OF MY FELLOW COLLEAGUES, I MEAN, THEY HAVE A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE AND A DIFFERENT NEED. SO, I MEAN, I DON'T WANT TO GO AND CUT IT AND MAKE IT UNIFORM. I'M DOWN TO TWO PEOPLE I'M NOT GOING TO PROBABLY HIRE. I MEAN, I WAS MY OWN I'M MY OWN CHIEF OF STAFF RIGHT NOW. I SERVED TWO MAYORS. SO SO I AGREE WITH THIS, BUT I THINK IT NEEDS TO COME THROUGH COMMITTEE AND REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACHIEVE. MAYBE WE NEED TO DO HUBS IN REGIONAL MODELS WHERE ALL THE THE CERS GO THERE AND TWO PEOPLE OR THREE PEOPLE SHARE ONE AND THEY CAN THEY TAKE CARE OF ALL THE CERS. AND THEN YOU HAVE TWO PEOPLE THAT ARE LIKE, YOU'RE RIGHT AND LEFT HANDS. I DON'T KNOW, BUT I DO THINK HAVING THREE CAN GET A LITTLE CROWDED. BUT AGAIN, I DON'T HAVE THE SAME NEEDS THAT I KNOW SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES HAVE. AND SO I WANT TO BE RESPECTFUL OF THAT. AND I DON'T THINK THIS IS WHERE WE START SLASHING PERSONNEL THAT AFFECTS US WITHOUT HAVING THAT ROBUST CONVERSATION. SO I THINK IT'S A GOOD TIME TO HAVE IT AT AT OUR COMMITTEE AND REALLY LOOK AT MAYBE CHANGING THE MODEL, LOOKING AT IT A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE, UNDERSTANDING WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACHIEVE. [06:30:01] AND BUT YEAH, REMEMBER THOSE DAYS? I THINK, KIM, YOU WERE HERE BEFORE THAT WHEN IT WAS SLIM. YEAH, IT WAS SLIM. I DID THREE, TWO, AND BUT I LOVED IT, AND I LEARNED EVERYTHING, AND SO. AND THERE'S NO, THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH CROSS TRAINING WITH A VARIOUS WITH 2 OR 3 PEOPLE. SO I'M GOING TO LISTEN TO THE DISCUSSION, BUT THAT THOSE ARE MY THOUGHTS ON THIS. BUT YEAH, THANK GOD I COULDN'T DO THE JOB NOW. THANK YOU. OKAY. LET'S SEE. MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT. THANK YOU. MAYOR I'M NOT GOING TO BE SUPPORTING THE AMENDMENT, BUT I DO LIKE WHERE COUNCIL MEMBER BLACKMON IS COMING FROM. FOR US TO DO AN ANALYZE THE BEST APPROACH I KNOW THAT I'VE BEEN IN MY OFFICE FOR TWO FOLKS FOR OVER A YEAR, AND IT'S IT'S HARD. IT'S A LOT EASIER WHEN YOU HAVE A COHESIVE TEAM OF THREE. BUT I ALSO KNOW THAT IN OUR COUNTERPARTS AT DISD SHARE A ADMIN FOR MULTIPLE TRUSTEES. AND SO TO JUST REALLY WANT TO TAKE A BIGGER EVALUATION. CITY MANAGER SEEING WHAT OTHER CITIES ARE DOING ACROSS THE COUNTRY TO SEE HOW WE CAN BE MORE EFFICIENT. BUT ALSO AGREE THAT EVERY COUNCIL DISTRICT IS IS UNIQUE. SOME DISTRICTS ARE VERY COMPACT. OTHERS STRETCH FROM NORTHWEST TO, TO FAR EAST. NUMBER OF CONSTITUENTS THAT EACH DISTRICT REPRESENTS IS ROUGHLY THE SAME, BUT SOME ARE MORE. SOME ARE LESS SOME CHAIR COMMITTEES. AND SO I THINK AT THIS POINT I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THE AMENDMENT, BUT I DO THINK IT'S A CONVERSATION THAT WE NEED TO HAVE. THANK YOU. MAYOR. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON, YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT 13. THANK YOU, MAYOR JOHNSON. I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS AMENDMENT. I WANTED TO FEEL LIKE WE NEED MORE BECAUSE OF THE WORK THAT WE'RE DOING. HOWEVER I UNDERSTAND THAT WE HAVE THREE, AND WE'RE GETTING WE'RE WORKING TO GET THINGS DONE IN DISTRICT FOUR. AND I CONCUR WITH MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO. OUR DISTRICTS ARE UNIQUE DIFFERENT IN SOME ASPECTS WHEN IT COMES TO THE NEED OF OUR COMMUNITY. AND SO I CAME, AS YOU JUST MENTIONED FROM AN ORGANIZATION THAT HAD ONE WHAT, ONE PERSON OR THREE TRUSTEES. AND THAT IS VERY DIFFICULT. A LOT OF THE WORK YOU PRETTY MUCH GET DONE BY YOURSELF THOSE THAT ARE LIKE ME, THAT ARE HANDS ON BECAUSE OF THE NEED THAT'S IN OUR COMMUNITY. AND I SERVE THE DISTRICT FOUR ACTUALLY SERVES THE SAME COMMUNITY THAT I SERVED AS A SCHOOL BOARD TRUSTEE, DISTRICT FIVE. SO I KNOW THE NEED THERE. I GREW UP IN THIS AREA, AND I WAS ELECTED OFFICIAL IN THE AREA FOR SIX YEARS AND CONTINUED TO SERVE. SO I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS AMENDMENT BECAUSE WE NEED I NEED MY STAFF TO HELP ME DO THE THINGS THAT WE NEED TO DO FOR DISTRICT FOUR. THANK YOU, MISS BLAIR. RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT 12. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I TOO WILL NOT BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THIS FOR SOME OF THE SAME REASONS. CHAIR JOHNSON HAS JUST SPOKE OF IN DISTRICT EIGHT. WE'RE REALLY WIDE, AND WE HAVE A LOT OF SERVICE. I MEAN, WE HAVE A LOT OF SERVICE REQUESTS FOR CODE. IN FACT, I HAVE CODE IN MY DISTRICT OFFICE BECAUSE WE HAVE SO MANY NEEDS, AND WE HAVE ONE PERSON WHO IS JUST DEDICATED TO MANAGING THE PEOPLE WHO COME IN WITH SERVICE REQUESTS, WHO DON'T HAVE THE TECHNOLOGY NOR OR AND OR THE, THEIR, THEIR MATURE, AND THEY DON'T KNOW HOW TO USE TECHNOLOGY IN ORDER TO GET ACCESS TO THREE, ONE, ONE. WE EVEN WE EVEN HAVE 311 KIOSKS IN OUR COMMUNITY OFFICE JUST SO THAT THAT THEY CAN COME IN AND AND UTILIZE THE SERVICES. SO TO SAY THAT I HAVE TO IS IS CHALLENGING, BUT FOR THOSE THAT DON'T NEED IT, THEY DON'T AND DON'T HAVE TO SUBSCRIBE TO THE THREE PERSON OFFICE. I APPLAUD THEM AND I DON'T WANT TO TAKE THE BUT I DON'T WANT TO TAKE THE CHOICE THAT EACH COUNCIL MEMBER HAS TO OPERATE THEIR, THEIR DISTRICT THE WAY THAT THEY NEED TO. SO AS A CONVERSATION PIECE, I THINK THIS IS APPROPRIATE. AND THIS IS THIS IS WELL INTENDED. BUT TO TELL ALL OF US THAT WE HAVE TO I JUST DON'T THINK THAT I THINK IT MAY BE A LITTLE A LITTLE HARSH FOR FOR THOSE THAT ACTUALLY NEEDED TO SAY THAT. NOW YOU CAN'T HAVE WHAT YOU NEED. SO FOR THAT REASON, I WILL NOT BE ABLE TO SUPPORT IT. [06:35:07] CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES ON YOUR AMENDMENT 13. THANK YOU. I'VE POINTED OUT TO A COUPLE OF OLD TIMERS THAT THE FIRST YEAR I WAS ON COUNCIL, COUNCIL MEMBER KLEINMAN SUBMITTED 70 PLUS AMENDMENTS. CERTAINLY NOT EVEN A PORTION OF THOSE PASSED, BUT HE DID IT TO POINT OUT THINGS AND START A DISCUSSION AND TO TALK ABOUT FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY. SO IN THAT VEIN, I AM DOING THE SAME. THE TRUTH IS, I'M CONFIDENT EVERY PERSON AROUND THIS HORSESHOE COULD DO THE JOB WITH TWO. EVERY ONE OF US. YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE BEEN A CITY EMPLOYEE BEFORE. EVERY PERSON HERE IS TALENTED ENOUGH TO GET THEMSELVES ELECTED. THEY COULD MANAGE THIS JOB WITH TWO. AND YES, THE FIRST DAY I WAS HERE, WE HAD ONE AND A HALF AND DAY TWO. WE ENDED UP WITH TWO EACH. SO IT HAS GROWN SIGNIFICANTLY. THE NUMBER I USED TO CALCULATE THE AMENDMENT WAS 85,000. AND THIS IS ACTUALLY AN UNDERESTIMATION OF WHAT THE COST IS. JACK, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SHARE WITH THE FULL AMOUNT IS YOU CAN ESTIMATE IF YOU DON'T HAVE IT HANDY. I RECALL THE THE AVERAGE COST FOR THE STAFF AND THE COUNCIL OFFICES 101,000, INCLUDING SALARY AND BENEFITS. SO 101,000 101,000 TIMES 14. SO YOU HAD ASKED ME IF I WANTED TO REVISE MY AMENDMENT TO INCLUDE THAT FULL AMOUNT. AND I SAID NO, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, YOU MIGHT NEED A TEMPORARY RIGHT. YOU MIGHT HAVE SOMEBODY ON MATERNITY LEAVE AND THEN SOMEBODY OUT SICK FOR, YOU KNOW, AN EXTENDED TIME YOU MIGHT NEED YOU MIGHT NEED SOME HELP, YOU MIGHT HAVE A SPECIAL PROJECT. SO I WANTED TO LEAVE THAT 15,000 IN. AND FRANKLY, WE ARE ALL DIFFERENT. WE DO HAVE DIFFERENT NEEDS. AND THAT BUDGET CAN SOMETIMES FILL A NEED THAT YOU CAN RECOGNIZE IN THE CITY THAT THE DEPARTMENTS DON'T SEE. BUT AS FAR AS STAFFING, I HOPE THAT YOU WILL ALL SERIOUSLY CONSIDER US. IF YOU'RE JUST FILLING UP THE NEED BECAUSE IT WAS GIVEN TO YOU, OR IF YOU TRULY ACTUALLY NEED IT. WHAT IF YOU HAD FIVE PEOPLE? WOULD THAT HAVE BEEN ENOUGH AND IT WOULD HAVE BEEN HARD TO GO TO FOUR? I MEAN, I THINK YOU SHOULD ACTUALLY THINK ABOUT THAT. THE LAST THING I'LL SAY IS IF YOU PARTICIPATE IN TEXAS MUNICIPAL LEAGUE OR THE NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES, YOU'LL KNOW THAT MOST COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE ZERO STAFF. SOME MIGHT HAVE ONE OR SHARE SOMEONE, BUT MOST HAVE NONE. SO THIS IS A VERY UNIQUE SITUATION. I THINK THAT IT'S AN IMPORTANT THING. PERHAPS WE'LL TALK ABOUT AN EFFICIENCY OR PERHAPS THE ADMINISTRATIVE AD HOC. WE'LL TALK ABOUT IT. BUT AS I SAID, IT'S THE MOST UNPOPULAR MOTION TODAY. AND THAT'S WHAT I'M EXPECTING. I THINK WE MIGHT BE READY FOR A VOTE, SIR. THANK YOU. I THINK YOU MIGHT BE RIGHT. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST AMENDMENT 13? SEEING NONE. SHOW YOUR SUPPORT BY RAISING YOUR PLACARD. SEALS RAISED IN FAVOR. MAYOR JOHNSON. COUNCIL MEMBERS. MENDELSOHN AND RIDLEY. WITH ONLY THREE RAISED IN FAVOR, THIS AMENDMENT FAILS. MR.. MAYOR. THAT WAS AMENDMENT 13. IS THERE ANYONE WILLING TO PUT FORWARD AMENDMENT 14? YES, SIR. YEAH. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR A MOTION. THANK YOU. THIS AMENDMENT REDUCES THE HR DEPARTMENT BY 10%. NOW THE DOLLAR AMOUNT. OKAY. AND IT MOVES THE MONEY INTO STREET MAINTENANCE? IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND? IT'S BEEN MOVED IN SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION, CHAIRMAN MENDELSOHN? YES, FOR FIVE MINUTES. THANK YOU. WHAT I'D LIKE TO CLARIFY IN THIS IS THAT 10%, IT'S NOT ACTUALLY 10% OF THE FULL AMOUNT OF THE BUDGET, BECAUSE WHAT WE'VE ALREADY SEEN IS A CITY MANAGER WHO'S ALREADY PARED DOWN HR. SO WHAT YOU'LL SEE IN THE AMENDMENT TEXT IS THAT THERE'S A -635,000. SO I'VE ALREADY BACKED THAT OUT. AND THEN THERE'S A SACRED CODE THING. THIS IS IT THIS IS INSURANCES. THOSE ARE ALSO NOT BEING REDUCED BECAUSE THAT WOULD MEAN ALL THE SACRED CODES ACROSS EVERY DEPARTMENT WOULD HAVE TO BE RECALCULATED. SO AGAIN, THAT ISN'T SO. ACTUALLY, WHEN YOU DO THE MATH YOU'RE ALMOST TALKING ABOUT 5% NOT 10%. NOW THE HR DEPARTMENT, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE FISCAL YEAR 16 BUDGET COMPARED TO THE FISCAL YEAR 26 PROPOSED, WHAT YOU SEE IS THE DEPARTMENT HAS GROWN 84%, WELL OUTPACING INFLATION. AND WE ALL KNOW OUR POPULATION HAS NOT GROWN SIGNIFICANTLY. THE BUDGET IN FISCAL YEAR 16 SHOWS A FULL TIME EQUIVALENT STAFFING OF 46.2. [06:40:07] THE PROPOSED BUDGET SHOWS A STAFFING LEVEL OF 73.9 FOR FULL TIME EQUIVALENTS. SO WHILE THE DEPARTMENT HAS GROWN IN STAFFING, IT'S ALSO OUTSOURCED CERTAIN FUNCTIONS. SO THE ONE THAT COMES TO MIND FOR ME IS A FAMILY MEDICAL LEAVE ACT ADMINISTRATION. WE ALL KNOW EVERY DEPARTMENT IN THE CITY HAS PERSONNEL THAT ARE DEDICATED TO HR FUNCTIONS. WE'VE ALSO INVESTED MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN TECHNOLOGY TO AUTOMATE AND STREAMLINE HR NOT TO GROW IT. THE AMENDMENT WILL REDUCE THE TEN YEAR GROWTH TO JUST OVER 65% INSTEAD OF THAT 84. AND IT'S AN EXTREMELY REASONABLE FIRST PASS TO ENCOURAGE A RETHINKING OF HOW THAT DEPARTMENT FUNCTIONS. THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF A COST THAT'S GROWN SIGNIFICANTLY IN OUR BUDGET, BUT CAN BE SCALED BACK A BIT WITHOUT ANY IMPACT TO THE PUBLIC. OUR RESIDENTS DIDN'T NOTICE WHEN THE BUDGET WENT UP AND SERVICES WERE NOT IMPROVED TO THEM, AND THEY WON'T NOTICE WHEN IT SHRINKS A LITTLE BIT AND THEIR TAXES DON'T GO UP QUITE AS MUCH. IN THIS CASE, IT'S GOING TO STREET REPAIR. I ORIGINALLY INTENDED IT TO BE A TAX REDUCTION. I DON'T THINK I'D HAVE THE VOTES FOR THAT. I'M NOT SURE I DO FOR THIS. THE REALITY IS WE HAVE TO DEPLOY TECHNOLOGY AND BEST PRACTICES TO PROVIDE BOTH TO OUR RESIDENTS AND INTERNAL CUSTOMERS. A MORE EFFICIENT MANNER FOR HUMAN RESOURCES. SO THAT'S THE AMENDMENT. I WILL SAY ONE MORE THING. SINCE I HAVE TWO MINUTES. THE MANAGER DOES NOT LIKE THIS AMENDMENT, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT. AND THIS IS THE KIND OF DEPARTMENT A MANAGER SHOULD TRY TO PROTECT. BUT IT'S EXACTLY OUR ROLE IN GOVERNANCE TO SAY THIS HAS GROWN TOO FAST. AND IT'S NOT IT'S NOT REASONABLE. AND ASK FOR THEM TO SERIOUSLY REVIEW WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THE DEPARTMENT. THANK YOU, MISS BLACKMON. YOU RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT 14. YEAH. I WAS GOING TO ASK HOW YOU FELT ABOUT IT. KIM, BUT MAYBE I SHOULD ASK NINA THE QUESTION FIRST. NINA, WITH A 439,000 DROP IN YOUR BUDGET. WHAT? WHAT DOES THAT. WHAT WILL YOU DO? HOW WILL YOU DO IT? BECAUSE WE TALK ABOUT GETTING PEOPLE HIRED, GETTING THEM ONBOARDED, GETTING THEM, YOU KNOW, GETTING JOBS POSTED AND GETTING THEM POSTED CORRECTLY. AND SO THOSE ARE BIG THINGS. AND SO I'M JUST WONDERING WHAT'S THE GIVE WITH THIS REDUCTION? THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. COUNCIL MEMBER BLACKMON NARVAEZ, DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES. WE WILL HAVE TO EXAMINE THE DEPARTMENT AND IDENTIFIED WHAT WOULD BE THE MOST APPROPRIATE PLACE. HOWEVER, MOST LIKELY IT WILL COME FROM STAFF. SO LET'S SAY THAT IF WE REDUCE IT FROM THE RECRUITMENT STAFF, THEN WE WILL HAVE FEWER PEOPLE DEDICATED TO RECRUITMENT. THEREFORE, THAT PROCESS IS GOING TO BE SLOWER. MOST LIKELY. AND IF WE DO IT FOR ONBOARDING VERY LIKELY THE ONBOARDING PROCESS THEN IS GOING TO SUFFER IF WE DO IT FOR COMPENSATION. OUR ABILITY TO IMPLEMENT COMPENSATION REQUEST COMPENSATION STUDIES. OUR ABILITY TO DO, MEET AND CONFER WILL DIMINISH IF WE DO IT FOR PERFORMANCE STAFF OR DEVELOPMENT STAFF, THEN WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO TRAIN AS MANY PEOPLE. I WILL SAY OUR DEPARTMENT AND WE HAVE BEEN, OVER THE YEARS WORKING REALLY HARD TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE HAS A FUNCTION AND EVERY EVERYONE IS WORKING AT CAPACITY. WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON MAKING IT MORE EFFICIENT. SO ANY TIME THAT WE CUT STAFF, THE WORK THAT THEY DO WILL GO AWAY. OKAY, SO I APOLOGIZE IF I MAY ADD TO NINA'S RESPONSE. ALSO LOOKING AT $440,000 REDUCTION LIKE NINA MENTIONED, IT'S PRIMARILY GOING TO COME FROM STAFFING, WHICH WOULD PROBABLY EQUATE TO ABOUT SIX POSITIONS. THAT WAS GOING TO BE MY NEXT QUESTION. AND SO FOR A DEPARTMENT THAT I BELIEVE IS ALREADY UNDERSTAFFED, AND I HEAR COMMENTS ABOUT THAT, WE'RE NOT BEING AS EFFECTIVE AS WE SHOULD BE AS AN HR DEPARTMENT. I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU CUT SIX POSITIONS AND BECOME MORE EFFECTIVE BECAUSE OF THAT. SO I WORRY THAT CUTTING THE POSITIONS WITHOUT HAVING A PLAN, WHICH WE'VE TALKED A LOT ABOUT TODAY, IS MAKING CHANGES. BEFORE YOU HAVE A WELL THOUGHT OUT PLAN, THEN IT MAY BE PREMATURE IN MY OPINION. [06:45:06] OKAY. THANK YOU. CAN I ADD TO THAT COUNCILWOMAN BLACKMON JUST BECAUSE I THINK THAT THIS IS A A GOOD OPPORTUNITY FOR ME JUST TO WEIGH IN ON SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT I DO APPRECIATE FROM COUNCILWOMAN MENDELSOHN. BUT LET ME SAY THIS WHEN I CAME BACK TO THE CITY IN 2017, I TOOK ON THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE HR DEPARTMENT. AND WHAT I CAN TELL YOU IS FROM MY HISTORY OF BEING IN THE CITY PREVIOUSLY AND COMING BACK INTO THE ROLE OF NOW PROVIDING THE OVERSIGHT, THE EXECUTIVE OVERSIGHT FOR THAT DEPARTMENT. WHAT WE LEARNED IS THAT WE WERE NEVER STAFFED PROPERLY. A LOT OF THE ISSUES AND A LOT OF THE CHALLENGES THAT WE HAVE DEALT WITH ACROSS THE CITY WERE BECAUSE EVERY YEAR WHEN THERE WERE CUTS, THE CUTS WERE MADE IN DEPARTMENTS LIKE HUMAN RESOURCES. AND SO IT HAS IT HAS NOT SERVED US WELL TO CONTINUE TO PULL AWAY FROM THAT DEPARTMENT AND THEN EXPECT A DIFFERENT OUTCOME IN A DIFFERENT RESULT. WHAT I CAN TELL YOU THAT WE HAVE DONE, WE HAVE LOOKED AT EVERY SINGLE FUNCTION WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT. WE HAVE IDENTIFIED WAYS TO ACTUALLY DELIVER SERVICES IN A IN A MUCH MORE STREAMLINED FASHION IN THE BUDGET THAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU. WE ARE PROPOSING, FINALLY, A TALENT CENTRAL PROGRAM WHERE WE CAN REALLY BEGIN TO WORK MORE COLLABORATIVELY WITH OUR CIVIL SERVICE DEPARTMENT. WE'VE HEARD THAT FROM COUNCIL MANY TIMES, AND THAT'S ACTUALLY A PART OF THE PROPOSED BUDGET THAT IS BEFORE YOU. LET ME ALSO SAY THIS MORNING WE CELEBRATED THE WORK OF THE HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT. THAT DEPARTMENT, IN THE CURRENT BUDGET THAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU, BECAUSE OF THE WORK OF THAT TEAM, WE WERE ABLE TO REALIZE A $12 MILLION SAVINGS IN THIS CURRENT BUDGET. AND SO WHAT I CAN TELL YOU IS THAT THE WORK IS BEING DONE AND THE EFFECTIVENESS AND THE OUTCOMES, WE HAVE THE RESULTS TO SHOW IT NOW. CAN WE CONTINUE TO IMPROVE THE BODY OF WORK? YES WE WILL. AND WE HAVE. AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT AS WE'RE DOING THAT WORK, THAT WE DON'T TAKE ARBITRARY NUMBERS, AND WE BEGIN TO REDUCE WITHOUT TRULY UNDERSTANDING THE SERVICES THAT WE ARE IMPACTING WITHIN THAT DEPARTMENT. SO I JUST WANTED TO GO ON RECORD. IT'S NOT THAT I DISLIKE IT, BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT AS WE LOOK AT AMENDMENTS OVERALL, THAT YOU TRULY KNOW THAT THERE ARE IMPACTS WHEN WE JUST MAKE DECISIONS AND WE PULL THINGS OUT. THERE'S NO SACRED COWS IN THIS BUDGET. AS I SHARED EARLIER, AND WE'VE DONE THE WORK OVER THE SUMMER TO BRING TO YOU SOMETHING THAT WE CAN ALL BE PROUD OF. BUT I DO APPRECIATE THE CONVERSATIONS AROUND THE HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT. THANK YOU. SO YOU SAID THAT IT WOULD REDUCE IT BY SIX PEOPLE, WHICH WOULD THEN YOU WOULD HAVE BASICALLY AN EXTRA FIVE PEOPLE WORKING BECAUSE YOU WOULD GO FROM ABOUT 61 TO 66. RIGHT. AND SO GIVEN WHAT YOU JUST EXPLAINED ABOUT YOUR NEW CENTRAL. YEAH. THEIR TALENT POOL. SO WITH THAT KIND OF ONLY FIVE PEOPLE INCREASE, COULD YOU STILL GET THE WORK DONE? THAT IS AN EXCELLENT QUESTION. AND THE ANSWER IS YES. HOWEVER, ANY TIME THAT YOU REDUCE RESOURCES, YOU EITHER INCREASE TIME OR DIMINISH QUALITY. SO SOMETHING HAS TO GIVE. YES, SOMETHING HAS TO GIVE. SO EITHER WE DO IT SLOWER WITH LESS QUALITY OR LESS QUANTITY WITH LESS PEOPLE. SO THE AS AS YOU DIMINISHED RESOURCES, THAT'S THE NATURAL CONSEQUENCE. SO WE WILL, YOU KNOW, ACCOMMODATE AND DO THE BEST WE CAN WITH THE RESOURCES WE HAVE. IF I MAY SAY, TOO, WE ARE ONE OF THE LEAST RESOURCED HR DEPARTMENTS IN A LARGE CITY IN TEXAS. WHEN YOU LOOK AT HOW MANY EMPLOYEES VERSUS WHAT IS THE RATIO WHERE ONE ACTUALLY WE ARE FROM THE LARGE CITIES, THE LEAST RESOURCE DEPARTMENT. AND, YOU KNOW, TO SPEAK TO CITY MANAGER'S COMMENT IT'S BECAUSE OF IT'S EASY TO CUT HR BECAUSE YOU'RE RIGHT AT 8.8 FOR THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING 8.8 MILLION FOR. AND HOW MANY EMPLOYEES DO WE HAVE. OVER 13,000. AND IF YOU LOOK AT WHAT YOU DO, I MEAN EVEN JUST TALENT ENGAGEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT, I MEAN, OVERSEES THE CITYWIDE PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS. YOU KNOW, I MEAN, THERE'S A LOT, BUT I THINK I UNDERSTAND THE DIRECTION THAT MISS MENDELSOHN HAS PUT FORTH. BUT I DON'T NECESSARILY KNOW IF IF WHAT SHE'S PUTTING FORTH WOULD ACTUALLY GET US THE RESULTS THAT WE ARE WANTING FROM YOU BECAUSE I, WE'VE ASKED YOU TO REALLY TRY TO GET PEOPLE ON BOARD, AND WE'VE TRIED TO RELOOK AT EVERYTHING. WE'RE NOT USING REIMAGINE. AND SO I'M NOT INCLINED TO SUPPORT THIS, BUT I'D LOVE TO HEAR THE CONVERSATION AROUND IT. [06:50:01] GIVEN THAT HR DOES USUALLY COME UP EVERY BUDGET CYCLE, WHICH THERE WE GO. AND AND WE DO WANT TO MAKE OUR EMPLOYEES SUCCESSFUL FROM THE DEPARTMENT THAT ACTUALLY GETS PEOPLE HERE, YOU KNOW, EITHER THROUGH AN INTERVIEW OR ONBOARDING TO WHEN THEY EXIT. RIGHT. AND THAT'S, THAT'S THAT'S WHAT YOUR DEPARTMENT DOES. SO. THANK YOU FOR COMING AND ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. MAYOR PRO TEM RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT 14. THANK YOU. MAYOR. CITY MANAGER, THIS IS ONE ITEM THAT THAT'S BEEN BROUGHT UP MULTIPLE TIMES ON HAVING A STREAMLINED, HAVING A FASTER ONBOARDING PROCESS. AND SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT WITH THE NEW TALENT TO CENTRAL, THAT'S GOING TO EXPEDITE AND CLEAN UP SOME OF THE I GUESS, HURDLES THAT WE'VE HAD PREVIOUSLY. ABSOLUTELY. AND WE THIS THIS ACTUALLY CAME FROM SOME WE ACTUALLY HAD A AUDIT THAT I BELIEVE WAS DONE TOWARDS THE END OF 23, 24. AND THERE WERE SEVERAL RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE HAVE BEEN WORKING THROUGH AND IMPLEMENTING THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS. THE ONE THAT WAS PRIMARY WAS HOW DO WE EASE THE EXPERIENCE FOR NEW HIRES COMING INTO THE CITY? WE KNOW THAT WE ALSO HAVE A CIVIL SERVICE SYSTEM. SO THIS TALENT CENTRAL IS ACTUALLY A NEW INITIATIVE APPROACH THAT WILL ACTUALLY BE DONE IN COORDINATION WITH BOTH OF THOSE DEPARTMENTS, TO REALLY BEGIN TO ADDRESS A LOT OF THOSE CONCERNS THAT WE'VE HEARD FROM AROUND THE HORSESHOE, AND BE ABLE TO REALLY SHOW THE RESULTS THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR. WE HAVE THE NEW TALENT ACQUISITION CAMPAIGN THAT IS NOW MOVING FORWARD. THAT WORK AGAIN IS BEING DONE JOINTLY. AND I ALSO WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THIS IS ALSO THE TEAM THAT EVERY SINGLE YEAR WE TALKED ABOUT BENEFITS THIS MORNING, BUT ALL OF THE BENEFIT OFFERINGS, THE ENTIRE ANNUAL HEALTH FAIR BENEFITS, ALL OF THAT IS COORDINATED THROUGH THE HR DEPARTMENT FOR THE ENTIRE CITY WORKFORCE. AND SO THIS DEPARTMENT HAS GROWN OVER TIME. IT'S GROWING A LITTLE BIT THIS YEAR. WHAT IS I KNOW YOU CAN'T PREDICT THE FUTURE, BUT DO YOU ANTICIPATE HAVING ADDITIONAL STAFF PEOPLE COMING ON NEXT FISCAL YEAR? I THINK WHAT WE'RE DOING OVERALL, I THINK YOU'VE HEARD ME TALK ABOUT THIS LAST YEAR AND AGAIN THIS YEAR, IS THAT WE'VE CONTINUED TO LOOK AT WAYS TO OPTIMIZE OUR STAFFING, AND THAT'S ACROSS THE BOARD FOR EVERY SINGLE DEPARTMENT. THERE ARE SOME AREAS THAT IT'S TAKEN US A LITTLE BIT LONGER, BECAUSE WE'RE CATCHING UP WITH SOME OF THE WAYS TO REIMAGINE THE WORK, BUT AT THE SAME TIME CREATING DELIVERY METHODS AND SERVICES. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THINGS LIKE AI. I THINK WHAT YOU SHOULD EXPECT IS THAT AS WE CONTINUE TO DEAL WITH SOME OF OUR PAIN POINTS, WE SHOULD ALSO BE LOOKING FOR THOSE NATURAL EFFICIENCIES THROUGHOUT ALL OF THE DEPARTMENTS, INCLUDING HR. AND SO IT'LL BE A PART OF OUR PROCESS. I NEVER HAVE PLANS TO GROW ANY DEPARTMENT, BUT WHEN YOU'VE BEEN BEHIND AND YOU'VE BEEN WORKING AT A DEFICIT WHEN IT COMES TO THE SERVICES, THE RAMPING UP IS TO REALLY HELP US BE ABLE TO ADDRESS THOSE PAIN POINTS, AND THEN WE CAN COME BACK AND ASSESS THOSE STAFFING MODELS. AND I'VE NOT I'VE NOT HESITATED OR SHIED AWAY FROM WHEN WE'VE DONE IT IN CERTAIN AREAS THAT WE NEED TO NOW START PULLING BACK AND OPTIMIZING THE STAFFING, WHICH IS WHY YOU'VE SEEN NOW TWO BUDGETS WHERE WE'VE SHOWN YOU THE NUMBER OF POSITIONS THAT WE NO LONGER NEED. AND SO YOU SHOULD EXPECT THAT FOR US EVEN WITH THIS DEPARTMENT GOING FORWARD. THANK YOU. AND THERE WAS A NUMBER, I THINK, ABOUT 10,000 EMPLOYEES. IS THAT SOLELY UNDER THE CITY'S HR? BECAUSE I KNOW THAT THERE'S ALSO DEPARTMENTS THAT HAVE THEIR OWN HR BUILT INTO IT. AND SO HOW MANY EMPLOYEES ARE ACTUALLY UNDER. YOUR PURVIEW. THE THE CITY HAS ABOUT 15,600 TOTAL POSITIONS. AND HR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PERSONNEL RECORDS FOR ALL OF THE POSITIONS. AND THROUGH WORKDAY, WHICH HAS BEEN AN EFFICIENCY AND IT'S BEEN A GREAT IMPROVEMENT FOR THE CITY AND HAS ALLOWED MORE WORK TO BE DONE IN THE DEPARTMENTS, BUT THAT IS MANAGED THROUGH THE HR DEPARTMENT. AND SO HOW MANY DEPARTMENTS HAVE THEIR INTERNAL HR? WELL I DON'T KNOW. DO YOU KNOW OFF THE TOP OF YOUR HEAD? YES. THERE ARE SOME HR RESOURCES. THEY ARE MOSTLY ADMINISTRATIVE. HR RESOURCES, SO THEY DO NOT CREATE PROGRAMS. THEY BASICALLY ASSIST MANAGERS WITH ADMINISTRATIVE WORK. SO THEY AUGMENT THEIR MANAGEMENT BY BY BY DOING SOME OF THEIR WORK. AND WE DO WE DO MORE MORE REQUESTS FOR THAT BECAUSE DEPARTMENTS HAVE, HAVE INDICATED THAT THEY'RE NOT GETTING WHAT THEY NEED IN ALL AREAS OF HR. SO AGAIN, MAKING REDUCTIONS DOESN'T HELP THAT PROCESS. AND THE PARKS DEPARTMENT HAS A DEDICATED HR GROUP SEPARATE OR I WOULD SAY THAT DO SOME OF THEIR TRAINING AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE. BUT THEY DON'T TAKE ON COMPLIANCE. THEY DON'T TAKE ON INVESTIGATIONS OR RESPONSES TO THE EEOC. [06:55:01] THEY DON'T TAKE ON THE I WILL SAY MORE HEAVY DUTY. HR WORK THAT IS DONE IN THE CENTRAL HR DEPARTMENT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MAYOR. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM BE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT 14. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YOU KNOW, WE EARLIER TODAY, WE PASSED AN AMENDMENT THAT CUT PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT BY 10% ACROSS ALL GENERAL FUND DEPARTMENTS. SO WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT CUTTING HR STAFF THAT CAN DELIVER PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND TRAINING IN-HOUSE, IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE A GREAT IDEA BECAUSE PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT IS A RETENTION TOOL. I MEAN, IT HELPS PEOPLE GET BETTER AT WHAT THEY DO AND FEEL CONNECTED TO A CAREER PATH AND TO THE CITY. SO I THINK FOR THAT REASON, I WOULDN'T SUPPORT THE AMENDMENT, BUT I DO THINK IT'S WORTHWHILE. WE HAD A COUPLE OF AUDITS DONE IN THE PAST TWO YEARS THAT REALLY TOOK A HARD LOOK AT SOME HR PRACTICES, AND SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE THE GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY COMMITTEE TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT, TO SEE IF WE ARE USING TECHNOLOGY TO AS OPTIMALLY AS WE CAN SO THAT WE'RE USING PEOPLE THE MOST EFFECTIVELY, THE MOST EFFECTIVE WAY THAT WE CAN TO ACQUIRE MORE PEOPLE TO COME AND WORK FOR THE CITY, TO WORK ON BEHALF OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE TAXPAYERS. SO SO I WON'T SUPPORT THIS, BUT I DO THINK WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO LOOK AT THE EFFICIENCY AND EFFECTIVENESS OF THE DEPARTMENT. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST AMENDMENT 14? IF NOT, PLEASE SIGNIFY YOUR SUPPORT FOR THE AMENDMENT BY RAISING YOUR CITY SEAL PLACARD. SEALS RAISED IN FAVOR MAYOR JOHNSON, COUNCIL MEMBER, ROTH, COUNCIL MEMBERS, MENDELSOHN AND RIDLEY. WITH ONLY FOUR. YES. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER ROTH MAYOR JOHNSON. COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN AND COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY. WITH ONLY FOUR SEALS BEING RAISED IN FAVOR, THE AMENDMENT FAILS. MR.. MAYOR. OKAY, THAT WAS AMENDMENT 14. IS THERE ANYONE WILLING TO FORWARD AMENDMENT 15? YES, SIR. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR A MOTION. THANK YOU. THIS IS THE LAST ONE WE THINK. YEAH, THAT'S THE LAST ONE THAT'S BEEN PUBLISHED. OKAY. SO THIS IS ABOUT LIBRARIES AND IT'S TO ACCELERATE SORRY. ACCELERATE THE PLAN TO IMPLEMENT THE REGIONAL MODEL FOR LIBRARY SERVICES BY. TAKING TWO BRANCH LIBRARIES OUT OF SERVICE BY MID-YEAR. MEANING APRIL 1ST. LOCATIONS TO BE DETERMINED BY CITY MANAGER. ACCELERATING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE REGIONAL MODEL WAS PART OF THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE NO NEW REVENUE TAX RATE. THE DOLLARS WOULD GO BACK TO THE LIBRARY TO IMMEDIATELY START EXTENDING WEEKEND AND HOURS AT BRANCH LIBRARIES, AS PART OF THE ENHANCED SERVICES AND REGIONAL MODEL LOCATIONS TO BE DETERMINED BY CITY MANAGER. IS THERE A SECOND $650,000 SWAP? IS THERE A SECOND? IT'S BEEN SECONDED. DO YOU HAVE ANY DISCUSSION, CHAIRWOMAN MENDELSOHN, AS IT HAPPENS, I DO. OKAY. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES FOR THAT, FOR AMENDMENT 15. THANK YOU. SO AGAIN, I LOVE LIBRARIES. I THINK THEY ARE ESSENTIAL TO OUR CITY, BUT THEY ARE A CITY AMENITY, NOT SOMETHING WE CAN PROVIDE TO EACH NEIGHBORHOOD. THE CHALLENGE OF A 14 ONE GOVERNANCE MODEL IS WE ALL FOCUS TOO HEAVILY ON JUST OUR OWN DISTRICTS, AND WHEN WE'RE SITTING HERE, WE NEED TO NOT JUST REPRESENT OUR DISTRICT, BUT ACTUALLY SERVE THE WHOLE CITY. WE MUST STRIVE TO CONSIDER THESE POLICY QUESTIONS BY LOOKING AT THE WHOLE CITY. WITH FEW EXCEPTIONS, OUR LIBRARIES ARE NOT OPEN SEVEN DAYS A WEEK. SO I THINK MANILA SAID IT WAS ONLY ONE AND THEY SHOULD BE. MOST LIBRARIES HAVE ONLY ONE DAY DURING THE WEEK THAT THEY'RE OPEN IN THE EVENING. WE HAVE 30 LIBRARIES IN A POPULATION OF ABOUT 1.3 MILLION. THAT MEANS WE HAVE A RATIO OF ONE LIBRARY FOR 43,300 PEOPLE. SO NOW LET'S LOOK AT AUSTIN. AUSTIN HAS 20 LIBRARIES AND A POPULATION OF ABOUT A MILLION. THEIR RATIO IS 1 TO 50,000. AGAIN, OURS IS 1 TO 43,300. FORT WORTH HAS 18 LIBRARIES AND AGAIN A POPULATION OF ABOUT A MILLION. THEIR RATIO IS 1 TO 55,000. SAN ANTONIO 29 LIBRARIES WITH A POPULATION OF APPROXIMATELY 1.5 MILLION. ONE LIBRARY FOR EVERY 51,700. AND HOUSTON, WITH 44 LIBRARIES AND A POPULATION OF APPROXIMATELY 2.3 MILLION. ONE LIBRARY FOR EVERY 51,700. SO AGAIN, WE'RE AT ONE FOR EVERY 43,300. AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT THESE NUMBERS, IT APPEARS HAVING 24 TO 26 LIBRARIES IS ACTUALLY THE RIGHT SIZE. IF WE WERE LOOKING AT BENCHMARKING, IF THIS GIVES YOU HEARTBURN, I'LL JUST SAY THIS. [07:00:05] HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT 30 LIBRARIES IS THE RIGHT NUMBER? BECAUSE WE DON'T. WE JUST SOMEHOW LET COUNCIL MEMBERS MAKE POLITICAL STATEMENTS AND POLITICAL MANEUVERS TO GET A LIBRARY IN A CERTAIN PART OF TOWN, IN THEIR DISTRICT, AND ENOUGH SUPPORT OF OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS. THIS WAS NOT DONE STRATEGICALLY. WE'VE NEVER LOOKED AT COST PER CAPITA. UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES WOULD YOU BE OKAY WITH CLOSING A LIBRARY? A LOW NUMBER OF VISITORS. LOW CIRCULATION. IF THERE WAS ACCESS TO THE INTERNET SOMEWHERE CLOSE BY, IT'S REALLY SOMETHING YOU NEED TO THINK ABOUT. WHEN WOULD IT BE? OKAY? INSTEAD OF WORRYING ABOUT THIS NEIGHBORHOOD IS GOING TO BE MAD AT ME, OR THE FRIENDS OF THE LIBRARY WILL BE MAD AT ME. WE'VE HAD PEOPLE ADVOCATING FOR LIBRARIES AND AGAINST THE CLOSURE OF A LIBRARY THEY'VE NEVER EVEN BEEN IN BECAUSE THEY LIKE THE IDEA OF LIBRARIES. I LOVE THE IDEA OF LIBRARIES. I FEEL LIKE I GREW UP IN LIBRARIES. MY MOTHER WAS A TEACHER. I RECEIVED AN UNFORTUNATE CALL FROM BILLY RAY WHEN I WAS BEING APPOINTED TO MY FIRST COMMISSION, TELLING ME THAT I WAS NOT ABLE TO BE APPOINTED BECAUSE THERE WAS A PROBLEM WITH MY BACKGROUND CHECK. AND THE PROBLEM WAS THAT I HAD A LIBRARY. FINE. AND SHE ASKED ME, COULD I CLEAR IT UP THAT DAY? I THINK IT GOT CLEARED UP THE NEXT DAY AFTER. BUT LIBRARIES ARE AN IMPORTANT PLACE. BUT WHAT THEY NEED TO BECOME IS A CENTER FOR KNOWLEDGE AND ACCESS TO INFORMATION. THEY NEED TO BE OPEN SEVEN DAYS A WEEK. OUR RESIDENTS SHOULDN'T EVEN HAVE TO THINK TWICE. TO THINK, IS THE LIBRARY OPEN TODAY? LIKE I HAVE A LIBRARY IS OPEN SATURDAY AND SUNDAY, BUT IT'S CLOSED MONDAY. BUT THEN IF YOU GO TO FREDA'S, FRETS, WELL, IT'S CLOSED SUNDAY, BUT THEY'RE OPEN MONDAY, SO YOU HAVE TO FIGURE OUT WHICH ONE CAN YOU GO TO BECAUSE THE TIMES ARE ALL DIFFERENT, WHICH I THINK COUNCIL MEMBER MAYOR PRO TEM MORENO WAS TRYING TO MAKE THAT POINT EARLIER. THIS IS REALLY AN IMPORTANT ISSUE. SO THE AMENDMENT CLOSES THE TWO LIBRARIES THIS FISCAL YEAR, EIGHT MONTHS FROM NOW. IT GIVES THEM THE TIME TO EVALUATE THE DIFFERENT LOCATIONS AND COME UP WITH A PLAN TO SECURE THE SITES APPROPRIATELY SO THAT WE DON'T END UP WITH AN ENCAMPMENT OR ANY OTHER KIND OF NEWS MEDIA WALKING THROUGH IT WHERE IT'S BECOME HOUSING. THE DOLLAR SAVED IN THIS FISCAL YEAR WOULD BE REPROGRAMED, SO THAT THE LIBRARY DEPARTMENT COULD PROVIDE THE SECURITY AT THOSE CLOSED LOCATIONS, BECAUSE THE DOLLAR AMOUNT OF THE AMENDMENT IS BEYOND WHAT IT WOULD NEED FOR ADDING THESE EXTRA HOURS. SO THAT THOSE LOCATIONS WOULD BE SECURE. THANK YOU. MAYOR PRO TEM IS RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I DEFINITELY SUPPORT THE REGIONAL MODEL. WE'LL ADD LIBRARIES TO BE SEVEN DAYS A WEEK. LONGER HOURS. CERTAINTY. I'VE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEND A LOT OF TIME WITH OUR LIBRARY DIRECTOR AND TRAVEL TO, TO VARIOUS LIBRARIES THROUGHOUT THE STATE TO TO LOOK AT BEST PRACTICES. A STRUGGLE WITH THIS ONE. CITY MANAGER. IF WE WERE TO CONTINUE DOING THE WORK AND IMPLEMENTING A REGIONAL MODEL WOULD AND WE FOUND OUT THAT WE HAD A PLAN THAT WAS READY TO GO AT MIDYEAR, WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO COME BACK WITH A ADJUSTMENT AT THAT TIME? YES, SIR. THE GOAL WOULD BE TO BEGIN THE WORK. I THINK WE'VE ALREADY STARTED LOOKING AT IN MY CONVERSATIONS WITH OUR LIBRARY DIRECTOR, WE'RE DEVELOPING THE DRAFT CRITERIA. I THINK NOW THAT WE HAVE THE CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE STRUCTURE. WE DEFINITELY WANT THAT TO BE ONE OF THE KEY ITEMS, BECAUSE I THINK IT'S REALLY GOING TO ALLOW FOR US TO MOVE INTO THE BEGINNING OF THE FISCAL YEAR WITH A PLAN THAT WE CAN COME BACK AND SHARE. AND WHEN I SAY A PLAN, HOW ARE WE GOING TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS? NOT NECESSARILY WHICH LIBRARIES ARE GOING TO BE IMPACTED IN THE MODEL. AND IF WE GET TO A POINT WHERE THE CITY COUNCIL HAS RECEIVED RECOMMENDATIONS FROM US AND THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE READY TO GO AND THAT PLAN IS BEING SUPPORTED, WE DEFINITELY WOULD BE ABLE TO MOVE THAT FORWARD. AND SO WHAT I WOULD SAY IS THAT IT IS GOING TO BE A PRIORITY BECAUSE WE KNOW THIS COUNCIL HAS MADE IT A PRIORITY, AND ANYTHING THAT WE CAN DELIVER SOONER THAN LATER, I THINK WILL BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF, OF OF THE CITY AS A WHOLE. SO DEFINITELY WOULD WANT TO WORK TOWARDS THAT. IF THAT'S THE WILL OF THE COUNCIL. THE GOAL WOULD BE SINCE WE START DEVELOPING THE BUDGET AND WILL BEGIN TO START WORKING ON THE NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET RIGHT AFTER THIS BUDGET IS ADOPTED, WE DO WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T RUN OUT OF TIME. SO WE'RE GOING TO BE ADVANCING EVEN OUR BUDGET SCHEDULE TO WHERE WE CAN BEGIN TO DO THAT WORK UP FRONT. SO THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. SO I DON'T THINK THAT I'M GOING TO BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THE AMENDMENT BECAUSE IT GIVES US A DATE CERTAIN. [07:05:02] AND I DON'T I MEAN, I LIKE A DATE CERTAIN BECAUSE IT PUTS PRESSURE ON US TO DELIVER A PLAN. BUT I ALSO WORRY THAT WE MIGHT NOT BE READY WITH THE RESULTS OF THAT PLAN. AND SO I WOULD JUST LIKE TO PROBABLY REVISIT THIS MID-YEAR TO SEE IF WE'RE READY TO MAKE ANY CHANGES AT THAT POINT. THANK YOU. MAYOR. MISS BLACKMON, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES ON AMENDMENT 15. SO, CAMERAMAN WITH THE SAVINGS, WILL THAT BE PUT BACK INTO THE LIBRARY SYSTEM AND NOT TO THE GENERAL FUND? BECAUSE WHAT MAKES THESE OTHER SUCCESSFUL IS THAT THEY FUND THEIR LIBRARY PER CAPITA OR HOWEVER PER BILL, THEY ACTUALLY PUT MONEY BACK INTO IT. AND IF YOU'RE GOING TO RIGHTSIZE IT, THEN IT SHOULD BE THE, THE ROI SHOULD BE PUT BACK INTO IT IN ORDER TO MAKE A ROBUST SYSTEM. DON'T JUST RIGHTSIZE IT FOR THE SAKE OF BUILDINGS. I THINK THAT WOULD DEFINITELY BE THE APPROACH. AND AS YOU'VE HEARD US TALK ABOUT HOW WE WOULD THEN TAKE THE REGIONAL MODEL AND ACTUALLY MAKE IT ROBUST, MAKE IT BE MORE OURS, WHERE OUR RESIDENTS HAVE MORE OPPORTUNITIES TO GO INTO THE LIBRARY, MANY MORE HOURS AND DAYS OF THE WEEK, BECAUSE WE KNOW RIGHT NOW WE'RE STILL AT A DEFICIT WITH EVEN HOW WE'RE CURRENTLY TREATING THE LIBRARY SYSTEM, BECAUSE WE'VE HAD TO GO THROUGH THESE BUDGETARY CONSTRAINTS AND MAKE SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS IN OUR LIBRARIES ACROSS THE CITY. SO THE REGIONAL MODEL SHOULD BE A IT SHOULD BE A REIMAGINING AND A REINVESTMENT INTO THE SYSTEM TO WHERE WE CAN NOW PROVIDE MORE ROBUST SERVICES. HOURS. THAT WOULD BE. YES. AND THEN THAT SHOULD ALLOW FOR US TO HAVE THAT LONGER TERM SUSTAINABILITY THAT I KNOW THAT COUNCIL IS LOOKING FOR, FOR THE SYSTEM. WE TALK ABOUT HOW IMPORTANT COMMITTEE WORK IS, AND I THINK THIS IS PERFECT FOR COMMITTEE. ESSER MR. GRACEY. BECAUSE THIS IS NOT RIGHT NOW THE TIME AND PLACE TO START TALKING ABOUT STRATEGY AND REIMAGINING AND REINVESTING IN RE REGIONALLY SOMETHING. AND SO I APPRECIATE THE SPIRIT OF IT, BUT I THINK THIS IS A MORE THOUGHTFUL APPROACH, NEEDS TO BE A MORE THOUGHTFUL APPROACH THAN TO JUST BECAUSE WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT A CITY MANAGER'S NO NEW TAX RATE, REVENUE OR SCENARIO. MY GLASSES ON. I MEAN, THOSE ARE THE DRASTIC THINGS TO GET YOU TO THE TO THE BOTTOM LINE. THOSE WOULD BE THE THOSE WOULD BE EXCUSE ME. I'M SORRY. COUNCILWOMAN BLACKMON. THOSE WOULD DEFINITELY BE THINGS. AS YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU ARE FACED WITH JUST, I WOULD SAY THE MOST COMPLICATED PIECES OF THIS PUZZLE, WE WOULD DEFINITELY HAVE TO LOOK AT DOING THOSE TYPES OF THINGS IF THAT'S THE DECISION THAT THE COUNCIL WOULD TAKE. BUT IT WOULD BE THE THINGS THAT I WOULD SAY WE WOULD WANT TO HAVE AS OUR LAST RESORT, BECAUSE WE'VE TALKED ABOUT HOW IMPORTANT IT IS TO GET THIS RIGHT AND TO DO THE ENGAGEMENT AND HAVE COUNSEL'S INPUT THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS. IF WE WERE TO DO IT ANY SOONER, IT'S REALLY GOING TO BE REALLY JUST STAFF COMING AND SAYING, HERE'S WHAT WE WANT TO DO VERSUS GIVING YOU THE OPPORTUNITY TO FULLY VET IT, WEIGH IT THROUGH, DO THE PROPER DUE DILIGENCE. I HAD ALREADY MENTIONED TO COUNCIL MEMBER GRACEY EARLIER TODAY THAT THIS SHOULD BE THE FIRST ITEM ON HIS COUNSEL COMMITTEE FORECAST. GREAT. AND WHILE I'M NOT ON IT, I'LL BE ATTENDING SINCE I'M SURE MY LIBRARY, THE LIBRARY WILL BE SOMEWHERE ANYWAY. BUT I DO THINK THAT WITH THIS CONVERSATION, THE COMMUNITY WILL UNDERSTAND WHAT THE PURPOSE IS, IS FOR THE SYSTEM. AND THEY'RE LOOKING AT. AND SO I THINK IT WILL MAKE IT. IT'S KIND OF LIKE WITH THE POOLS, YOU KNOW, IT'S A IT'S PREDICTABILITY. IT'S NOT JUST PREDICTABILITY WITH THE HOURS. IT'S PREDICTABILITY WITH THE PROCESS IN WHICH HOW IT'S GOING TO CLOSE DOWN. AND THAT'S COMFORTING BECAUSE THEY'RE COMMUNITY ASSETS. THEY SEE THEM AS THEIR COMMUNITY ASSETS. SO, I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THIS. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST AMENDMENT NUMBER 15? SEEING NONE, PLEASE SIGNIFY YOUR SUPPORT BY RAISING YOUR PLACARD. SEALS RAISED IN FAVOR. MAYOR JOHNSON AND COUNCIL MEMBER MENDELSOHN. WITH ONLY TWO SEALS RAISED IN FAVOR. THE AMENDMENT FAILS, MISTER MAYOR. ALL RIGHT. I THINK THAT'S ALL OF OUR AMENDMENTS IN OUR PACKET TODAY. MAY I ASK A POINT OF PERSONAL PRIVILEGE? SURE. WHAT'S THE. COULD WE HAVE THE CITY SECRETARY JUST REVIEW ALL THE AMENDMENTS AND SAY IF IT WAS PASS, FAIL OR WITHDRAWN? SURE. THANK YOU SO MUCH. OKAY. AMENDMENT ONE, FAILED. AMENDMENT TWO FAILED. AMENDMENT THREE WAS WITHDRAWN. AMENDMENT FOUR PASSED. AMENDMENT FIVE PASSED. AMENDMENT SIX WAS WITHDRAWN. AMENDMENT NINE WAS HELD. AMENDMENT TEN, PASSED. AMENDMENT 11, FAILED AMENDMENT 12, FAILED AMENDMENT 13 FAILED. AMENDMENT 14 FAILED AND AMENDMENT 15 FAILED. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. WELL, THAT'S IT FOR THAT BRIEFING. [07:10:02] I BELIEVE MADAM CITY MANAGER, IT'S BACK TO YOU FOR YOUR BRIEFINGS, MR. [3. 25-2333A First reading and passage of the appropriation ordinance appropriating funds for the proposed FY 2025-26 City of Dallas Operating, Capital, and Grant & Trust Budgets (1) for the maintenance and operation of various departments; (2) authorizing the City Manager to make certain adjustments; (3) appropriating funds for public improvements to be financed from bond funds and other revenues of the city of Dallas for fiscal year 2025-26; and (4) providing an effective date - Not to exceed $5,510,422,946 - Financing: General Fund ($1,965,019,000), General Obligation Debt ($491,015,332), Capital Funds ($952,657,537), Enterprise/Other Funds ($1,530,942,519), Internal Service and Other Funds ($299,422,205), Grants, Trusts, and Other Funds ($264,014,138), and Employee Retirement Fund ($7,352,215)] MAYOR. I'M SORRY. BEFORE WE GET TO YOUR BRIEFINGS, THERE IS AN AGENDA ITEM, ITEM THREE. OKAY, I'LL READ THAT ITEM INTO THE RECORD. AGENDA ITEM THREE IS THE FIRST READING AND PASSAGE. PASSAGE OF THE APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR THE PROPOSED FY 20 2526. CITY OF DALLAS OPERATING CAPITAL AND GRANT AND TRUST BUDGETS. ONE FOR THE MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION OF VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS. TWO AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO MAKE CERTAIN ADJUSTMENTS THREE APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS TO BE FINANCED FROM BOND FUNDS AND OTHER REVENUES OF THE CITY OF DALLAS FOR FISCAL YEAR 20 2526, AND FOR PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE NOT TO EXCEED $5,510,422,946. YOU DO HAVE INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM. EACH SPEAKER WILL BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES. YOUR FIRST SPEAKER IS MUHAMMAD ABDULLAH. MUHAMMAD ABDULLAH IS VIRTUAL. MR. ABDULLAH, IF YOU CAN HEAR ME, WILL YOU PLEASE TURN ON YOUR MONITOR AND YOU MAY BEGIN. OKAY, WE'LL COME BACK. BONNIE BROWN. BONNIE BROWN IS NOT PRESENT. GERRY BARRETT HAS CANCELED. KERRY SCHWEITZER. KERRY SCHWEITZER IS NOT PRESENT. DAVID. MARQUIS. DAVID MARQUIS IS NOT PRESENT. BARRY. BLACKMON. BLACKMON. BARRY LACHMAN IS NOT PRESENT TO TO SIGN. AMARI HAS CANCELED A SHELL. MORGAN. OKAY. MISS MORGAN IS PRESENT. AND OUR MEDIA. YOU MAY HAVE A. LET'S SEE. HOW ARE WE GOING TO DO THIS? THANK YOU. FEEL VERY OFFICIAL AT THE TABLE HERE. SO MICHELLE MORGAN THE DIRECTOR OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS AT THE DALLAS MUSEUM OF ART. ACTUALLY, I JUST WANTED A MOMENT TO BRIEFLY SPEAK TO THE BUDGET CONVERSATION YOU ALL WERE JUST HAVING. FIRST, JUST THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONTINUED SUPPORT OF THE ARTS. WE KNOW THIS IS INCREDIBLY TOUGH BUDGET YEAR. AND REALLY JUST APPRECIATE THE COMMITMENT TO ENSURE NO MORE CUTS TAKE PLACE TO OUR TAX REVENUE DRIVING SECTOR. I ALSO WANTED TO BRIEFLY BRING A BUDGET RELATED ISSUE UNIQUE TO THE DMA TO THE BODY'S ATTENTION. IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THIS IS COMPLETELY SEPARATE FROM THE OAC BUDGET ITEM THAT WE ALL KNOW IS ALREADY SO IMPORTANT TO PROTECT. AS MANY OF YOU KNOW, FROM OUR WORK TOGETHER. THE DMA IS ACTUALLY A CITY OWNED FACILITY THAT HOUSES THE CITY'S ART COLLECTION. MAINTENANCE AND DAILY OPERATIONS OF THAT FACILITY ACTUALLY FALL UNDER THE OFFICE OF FACILITIES AND REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT UNDER OUR CURRENT AGREEMENTS RECENTLY RENEWED, THIS OFFICE REMAINS RESPONSIBLE FOR ENSURING THE BUILDING RUNS EFFICIENTLY AND SAFELY. WHILE WE USE THIS PERIOD TO REALLY EXPLORE A LONGER TERM CONTRACT THAT BETTER SERVES THE CITY AND THE DMA. DESPITE THAT INTENT FOR BUSINESS AS USUAL OVER THE NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS, WE DID JUST RECENTLY LEARN THAT THERE'S A PLAN TO REDUCE VITAL STAFF SUPPORT AT OUR FACILITY TO MEET BUDGET OBLIGATIONS SET TO TAKE EFFECT OCTOBER 1ST. WE KNOW THAT SUCH A REDUCTION REALLY COULD HAVE SERIOUS CONSEQUENCES, AS WE DO NOT HAVE THE BANDWIDTH ON STAFF CURRENTLY TO ABSORB THAT. SO WHILE WE ARE INCREDIBLY GRATEFUL FOR THE COLLABORATIVE WORK BETWEEN OAC AND FRM IN THE LAST COUPLE OF DAYS, I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'RE STILL HERE, BUT MARTIN. ACM LIZ, ACM DONZELL. GLENN REALLY APPRECIATE Y'ALL'S WORK TO COME UP WITH A CREATIVE SOLUTION HERE. REGARDLESS OF THAT, THOUGH, WE STILL FIND OURSELVES IN A SPOT WITHOUT A FIRM PLAN IN PLACE TO ENSURE WE HAVE SUPPORT 30 DAYS FROM WHEN A CHANGE IS SUPPOSED TO TAKE EFFECT. WELL, I'D LOVE TO ASK FOR NO CHANGES, PERIOD. UNDERSTANDING THE BUDGET REALITY. WE REALLY ARE JUST ON BEHALF OF THE DMA. JUST WANT TO CALL YOUR ATTENTION AND YOUR SUPPORT TO ENSURE OUR MINIMUM STAFFING REQUIREMENTS ARE MET AND OUR MOST RECENT ASK TO ENSURE THAT NO STAFF CHANGES OCCUR BEFORE JANUARY 1ST. WE ARE CONFIDENT THAT THAT SHORT EXTENSION FROM OCTOBER TO JANUARY WILL GIVE US ADEQUATE TIME TO ENSURE WE HAVE OUR NEEDS MET AND IMPLEMENT THE MOST [07:15:04] RECENT CREATIVE SOLUTION THAT FRM AND OAC HAVE COME UP WITH. HAPPY TO TALK THIS VERY COMPLEX ISSUE IN MORE DETAIL OFFLINE, BUT APPRECIATE YOUR SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I WOULD LIKE TO NOTE THAT MUHAMMAD ABDULLAH IS NO LONGER ONLINE, SO HE'S NOT PRESENT. MELISSA KATZ IS NOT PRESENT. ROBERT ROSS NOT PRESENT. CATHERINE CARA. CATHERINE GARIN NOT ONLINE. AND MIKE HOOK PREVIOUSLY SPOKE. THESE ARE YOUR. WELL, THIS WAS YOUR SPEAKER FOR THIS ITEM, MR. MAYOR. OKAY. HOLD ON ONE SECOND. HOLD ON ONE SECOND. OH, OKAY. I'M TOLD CATHERINE GARRETT IS ONLINE. MISS GARRETT. OKAY. YOU MAY. WE CAN SEE YOU. YOU MAY CONTINUE. THANK YOU SO MUCH. GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M CATHERINE GUERRA. I LIVE IN DISTRICT NINE, AND I SERVE ON THE CITY'S ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION. BUDGET SEASON IS ALWAYS CHALLENGING. I DON'T TAKE LIGHTLY THAT YOU ALL HAVE A GREAT NUMBER OF PRIORITIES TO BALANCE, AND THAT YOUR POSITIONS OF LEADERSHIP, YOU KNOW, REQUIRE YOU TO MAKE THESE REALLY HARD CHOICES FOR ALL OF US. I'M HERE TO SPEAK ABOUT THE $13 MILLION IN CUTS THAT WERE PROPOSED IN A CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS MEMO THAT, FORTUNATELY, WE DID NOT SEE AS AN AMENDMENT TODAY AND HOPE NOT TO SEE AT THE NEXT MEETING. THAT WILL ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY IMPACT FOLKS IN OUR COMMUNITY WHO FACE MUCH MORE DIFFICULT FINANCIAL CHOICES EVERY DAY. IF WE WERE TO CUT THE COMMUNITY CARE SERVICES THAT HELP WITH RENT AND KEEPING THE LIGHTS ON FOR FAMILIES FOR EMERGENCY SHELTERS, WHO DOES THAT BENEFIT? CUTTING THE FUNDING FOR THE BUSINESS ENTERPRISE PROGRAM TO GROW SMALL LOCAL BUSINESSES. WHO DOES THAT BENEFIT? IF WE CUT THE FUNDING FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING, DRIVERS OF OPPORTUNITY OR ECONOMIC MOBILITY AS PROPOSED, WHO BENEFITS? WHO IS OUR BUDGET FOR? IS IT INTENDED TO EXCLUSIVELY BENEFIT THE TOP 1% IN DALLAS? ARE WE REALLY COMFORTABLE AVOIDING AND PASSING OFF THESE COMPLEX AND CHALLENGING ISSUES TO OUR STRUGGLING NONPROFITS, OR TO THE COUNTY WHO IS HAVING THESE EXACT SAME CHALLENGING BUDGET CONVERSATIONS ABOUT SHORTFALLS OUR CITY MANAGER'S BUDGET CONSIDERS ALL OF OUR RESIDENTS NEEDS, WITH THOUGHTFUL FUNDING ALLOCATIONS SUPPORTED BY DATA AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, COMMUNITY INPUT. VISION ZERO IS NOT A NICE TO HAVE. IT IS A PUBLIC SAFETY PLAN CREATED OUT OF NECESSITY TO ADDRESS REPEATED TRAFFIC DEATHS, WHICH WE BELIEVE CAN BE PREVENTED. BUT THE MOST SIGNIFICANT OF THOSE PROPOSED CUTS ARE TO THE CLIMATE PLAN. AND WHEN I SAY CUT, I MEAN END THE PLAN THAT COUNCIL UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED. RESIDENTS IN OUR COMMUNITY SURVEY AND IN OUR BUDGET TOWN HALLS ACROSS THE CITY HAVE TOLD US YEAR AFTER YEAR THAT ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY IS A PROBLEM AND THAT ADDRESSING IT IS A PRIORITY. THE PUBLIC HEALTH IMPLICATIONS OF AIR POLLUTION EXPOSURE AND URBAN HEAT ISLAND IN OUR COMMUNITIES IS BACKED BY SCIENTIFIC DATA THAT WE ARE NOT GOING TO SIMPLY IGNORE. OUR CAP AND OUR DEDICATED CITY DEPARTMENTS ARE WHY WE HAVE SOME OF THE MOST BEAUTIFUL GREEN SPACES AND PARKS IN THE REGION. I'D LIKE TO INVITE ANY COUNCIL MEMBERS, ESPECIALLY OUR NEW MEMBERS, WHO WANT TO LEARN ABOUT THE COMMUNITY IMPACT OF THESE ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES, TO FIRST REACH OUT TO THEIR COLLEAGUES IN DISTRICT SIX OR 7 OR 8, OR ANY MEMBER OF THE CITY'S ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION. THANK YOU TO OUR CITY MANAGER AND OUR CITY STAFF FOR WORKING SO DILIGENTLY ON THIS BUDGET, AT THE BUDGET, TOWN HALLS AND YEAR ROUND TO IMPLEMENT THESE PROGRAMS. AND THANK YOU TO COUNCIL FOR THE VERY THOUGHTFUL AND INSIGHTFUL CONVERSATIONS. VERY PRODUCTIVE, I THINK, THAT WE HAD TODAY. AND IF WE WANT A VIBRANT AND SUSTAINABLE DALLAS, WE CANNOT LEAVE OUR MOST VULNERABLE RESIDENTS BEHIND. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THESE CONCLUDES OUR SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM. OKAY. I MOVE APPROVAL OF ITEM THREE. I LIKE THAT. IS THERE A SECOND? ALL RIGHT. THERE'S. I'VE GOT TO FINISH THE. YOU HAVE MORE OF IT THAN THAT. JUST A LITTLE BIT. OH, I THOUGHT YOU SAID YOU JUST MOVE APPROVAL. NO, I JUST TOOK A BREATH. I TOOK. I SAID MOVE APPROVAL. BUT I WANTED TO FINISH THE AMENDMENT. OKAY. WELL, THEN. WELL, THAT SECOND DOESN'T COUNT. OKAY. WE'RE GOING TO LET WE'RE GOING TO LET THE DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM DO THE WHOLE MOTION. GO AHEAD. OKAY. MOVE APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER THREE WITH THE INCORPORATION OF THE THREE AMENDMENTS THAT RECEIVED MAJORITY SUPPORT THROUGH THE STRAW POLL PROCESS. SECOND, NOW IT'S BEEN SECONDED. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? ANYONE SEEING NONE. DO WE NEED A RECORD VOTE ON THAT? WE DO NOT NEED THAT. OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE EYES HAVE IT. AGENDA ITEM THREE. IS THAT WHAT IT WAS? THAT'S CORRECT. ALL RIGHT. NOW, I THINK NOW YOU'RE BRIEFING. [C. 25-2625A Omnibus Ordinance Review] WE'RE READY FOR YOUR BRIEFING. THANK YOU, MR. [07:20:04] MAYOR. SO OUR FINAL BRIEFING FOR TODAY IS TO PRESENT THE OMNIBUS ORDINANCE REVIEW. THIS INITIATIVE REPRESENTS A PROACTIVE AND THOUGHTFUL EFFORT TO ENSURE THAT OUR CITY REMAINS CURRENT, CLEAR, AND CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY'S OPERATIONS AND DELIVERY SERVICE PRIORITIES. OVER TIME, THE NEEDS OF OUR CITY HAVE EVOLVED AND PROGRAMS HAVE BEEN REORGANIZED OR RETIRED. CERTAIN CITY ORDINANCES HAVE BECOME OUTDATED OR NO LONGER ALIGNED WITH THE WAY WE OPERATE TODAY. THE REVIEW PROCESS HAS INVOLVED COLLABORATION ACROSS MULTIPLE DEPARTMENTS AND IN COORDINATION WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. THE PURPOSE OF THIS EFFORT IS TO IMPROVE TRANSPARENCY AND SUPPORT A MORE EFFICIENT CODE STRUCTURE THAT BETTER REFLECTS HOW WE SERVE OUR RESIDENTS. I WANT TO THANK ALL OF THE DEPARTMENT LEADERS WHO CONTRIBUTED THEIR TIME AND THEIR EXPERTISE AS WE'VE GONE THROUGH THIS PROCESS. AS YOU WILL REMEMBER, THIS WAS AN INITIATIVE THAT WE LAID OUT EARLIER IN THE SPRING AS PART OF OUR JOURNEY FORWARD WITH THE CITY MANAGER'S 100 DAY PLAN. AND AT THIS TIME, I'D LIKE TO TURN IT OVER TO THE TEAM TO BEGIN TODAY'S PRESENTATION. I DO ALSO WANT TO NOTE THAT STAFF MADE THEMSELVES AVAILABLE OVER THE LAST FEW WEEKS TO MEET WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS INDIVIDUALLY. AND I DO BELIEVE THAT SEVERAL COUNCIL MEMBERS HERE TODAY TOOK THE OPPORTUNITY TO GO THROUGH THE THE RECOMMENDATIONS WITH STAFF ONE ON ONE. WITH THAT, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO LIZ, OUR ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER. THANK YOU, LIZ. THANK YOU, CITY MANAGER TOLBERT. AND THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL. I AM LICINIO PEREIRA. I SERVE AS ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER. AND OF COURSE, I AM JOINED BY MULTIPLE DEPARTMENT LEADERS WHO HAVE WORKED TOGETHER ON THIS OMNIBUS ORDINANCE. WE FIRST BRIEFED THIS TO OUR COMMITTEE BEFORE RECESS. IT'S A BROAD CLEANUP CODE INITIATIVE INVOLVING, OF COURSE, MULTIPLE DEPARTMENTS, INCLUDING OUR CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, WHO PROVIDED THE FINAL LEGAL REVIEW. THIS IS INTENDED TO BE BRIEF AND SUCCINCT, AND IT'S SCHEDULED TO BE ON YOUR VOTING AGENDA FOR 910 NEXT WEEK. BUT WE DID WANT TO COME BACK BECAUSE, OF COURSE, WE HAVE NEW MEMBERS WHO MAY NEED TO KNOW MORE ABOUT IT. REALLY, IT IS A HOUSEKEEPING PROVISION WHICH WE'RE CLEANING UP THE CODE BECAUSE THERE ARE THINGS ACCUMULATED PROVISIONS THAT ARE OUTDATED, MAYBE UNENFORCEABLE, OR INCONSISTENT WITH CURRENT PRACTICES. ADDITIONALLY, CHANGES IN STATE OR FEDERAL LAW HAVE PREEMPTED CERTAIN AREAS OF LOCAL REGULATION. SO THIS REVIEW, AS CITY MANAGER TOLBERT HAS EXPLAINED, WAS PART OF HER 100 DAY SPRINT, HER PLAN TO CREATE EFFICIENCIES A CLEARER, MORE ENFORCEABLE REGULATION THAT REFLECT HOW OUR CITY OPERATES. SO IT AGAIN, IT ORIGINALLY BRIEFED TO THE COMMITTEE AND IT WILL BE ON YOUR AGENDA FOR NEXT FOR NEXT WEEK. AGAIN WE'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH THE NEXT SLIDE. BUT I BASICALLY SAID WHAT WHAT IT IS IT'S REALLY JUST A LEGISLATIVE ACTION TO CLEAN UP. IT'S NOT CREATING NEW POLICY, BUT RATHER CLARIFYING WHAT'S ENFORCEABLE AND TO ENSURE ALIGNMENT WITH APPLICABLE LAWS. AND THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. WHY IT MATTERS NOW. IT MATTERS BECAUSE WE NEED TO KEEP OUR CODE UPDATED. WE NEED WE CANNOT EXPOSE THE CITY TO UNNECESSARY LEGAL RISKS ACCORDING TO OUR CITY ATTORNEYS. THEY CAUSE CONFUSION FOR OUR STAFF, FOR OUR RESIDENTS AND BUSINESSES. BY ALIGNING OUR CODE, WE ARE REDUCING THESE RISKS AND STREAMLINING ENFORCEMENT MEASURES. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. EVERY DEPARTMENT WAS TASKED TO PARTICIPATE. AND SO WHAT YOU'LL SEE HERE IS THE CULMINATION OF A PRETTY EXTENSIVE PROCESS. OVER 150 CODE SECTIONS WERE SCREENED FOR ENFORCEABILITY AND LEGAL STANDING, WITH THE FINAL LEGAL VETTING, OF COURSE, COORDINATING WITH OUR CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. THE NEXT SLIDES WILL BE PRESENTED BY OUR DIRECTORS, CLIFTON GILLESPIE, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR ASHLEY EUBANKS, AND DIRECTOR CHRISTOPHER CHRISTIANS. I'M PASSING IT NOW TO DIRECTOR GILLESPIE. GOOD EVENING, CLIFF GILLESPIE, DIRECTOR, SANITATION. WE'LL WALK THROUGH SOME OF THE HIGHLIGHTS OF THE ORDINANCE STARTING WITH CHAPTER 13, A PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE DALLAS TRANSIT SYSTEM, WHICH WAS PRE DART MANY ITEMS HAVE BEEN REPEALED. CHAPTER 39 RAILROAD REGULATIONS WHICH ARE FEDERALLY PREEMPTED, AND OTHER DELETIONS INCLUDING LOAN BROKERS, PRIVATE DETECTIVES, TREE UTILITY RULES FROM THE 1940S. NEXT SLIDE. ON SLIDE SEVEN, SEVERAL CHAPTERS HAVE BEEN UPDATED TO REFLECT OPERATIONAL CHANGES, SUCH AS THE TRANSFER OF REAL ESTATE SERVICES TO THE FACILITIES AND REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT, AND UPDATES TO WASTE MANAGEMENT, PARKING AND ATM SITING REGULATIONS. [07:25:02] THESE CHANGES BRING THE CODE INTO ALIGNMENT WITH HOW DEPARTMENTS CURRENTLY OPERATE. GOOD EVENING, CHRIS CHRISTIAN, DIRECTOR OF CODE COMPLIANCE SERVICES. CHAPTER EIGHT REFLECTS PROVISIONS WE ADDED TO REQUIRE ALLERGEN AWARENESS, POSTERS AND COMMERCIAL KITCHENS TO ALIGN WITH SENATE BILL 812, AND ALSO THE REMOVAL OF OUTDATED PROVISIONS LIKE DOG FRIENDLY PATIOS HAVE BEEN REMOVED IN LIGHT OF REVISED STATE CODES, ACCORDING TO SENATE BILL 476. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. THIS SLIDE DETAILS OTHER ORDINANCES THAT HAVE BEEN REPEALED THAT ARE NO LONGER ENFORCEABLE OR NOW PREEMPTED BY STATE LAW, LIKE THE EVICTION NOTICE ORDINANCE, THE EARNED PAID SICK TIME ORDINANCE, AND THE REST BREAK ORDINANCE. THESE ARE CHANGES THAT BRING OUR CODE INTO COMPLIANCE WITH STATE LAW. NEXT SLIDE. ON SLIDE TEN, THERE'S MULTIPLE PLACES WE'VE STREAMLINED THE LANGUAGE, UPDATED DEFINITIONS, AND IMPROVED PERMIT PROCESSES SUCH AS THOSE RELATED TO RIGHTS OF WAYS AND NEWSRACKS. THE SLIDE REFLECTS EFFORTS TO REDUCE AMBIGUITY AND IMPROVE USABILITY OF THE CODE FOR STAFF AND RESIDENTS ALIKE. NEXT SLIDE. IN SUMMARY, THIS ORDINANCE IS A FOUNDATIONAL CLEANUP MEASURE AND POSITIONS US FOR FUTURE CODE MODERNIZATION EFFORTS. WITH COUNCIL'S CONSIDERATION, THIS ORDINANCE WILL BE A KEY STEP TOWARD MAINTAINING OUR GOALS OF EFFICIENCY, EFFICIENCY, AND GOOD GOVERNANCE. NOW, WE WOULD LIKE YOU TO KNOW THAT THIS IS AN ITEM AGAIN ON ON YOUR AGENDA FOR NEXT WEEK ON THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA. WE WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND NOTE THAT THE REMAINING SLIDES REALLY JUST BREAK DOWN THE NUMBER OF CHAPTERS AS WELL AS THE TITLES, THE DEPARTMENT AND THE APPLICABLE PORTFOLIO, THE CATEGORY I.E. WAS IT OUTDATED, WAS IT UPDATED? WAS IT PREEMPTED? AND A SUMMARY OF OF WHAT THE CHAPTER STOOD FOR. WE ARE HERE NOW TO TAKE YOUR QUESTIONS, CONCERNS OR COMMENTS. AND THANK YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR TIME AND ATTENTION. ANY QUESTIONS EVERYONE. WE ARE ON BRIEFING ITEM C ON TODAY'S AGENDA FOR THE PUBLIC. GOING ONCE, GOING TWICE. NO QUESTIONS. WOW THAT WAS INCREDIBLE. GREAT JOB GUYS. MADAM CITY MANAGER, THAT'S YOUR PANEL. I'LL LET YOU DISMISS THEM, BUT THERE ARE NO QUESTIONS FROM THE MEMBERS. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THE ITEM WILL BE ON YOUR VOTING AGENDA FOR NEXT WEDNESDAY. THANK YOU AGAIN TO THE TEAM FOR A JOB WELL DONE. MR. MAYOR. THAT CONCLUDES OUR BRIEFINGS FOR TODAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU. OKAY. OKAY. LET'S SEE HERE, MADAM CITY SECRETARY, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE ON TODAY'S AGENDA THAT WE NEED TO DEAL WITH? MR. MAYOR, THERE ARE NO FURTHER ITEMS ON YOUR AGENDA. AND WE'VE HANDLED ALL THE SPEAKERS. YES, WE HANDLED ALL THE SPEAKERS THIS MORNING. THAT BEING SAID, 06:19 P.M. THIS MEETING OF THE DALLAS CITY COUNCIL IS ADJOURNED. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.